Who in the World is Big Meant to Appeal To?

[Tara]

I wasn't sure if this warranted its own topic, so if there is a better place for this, feel free to move and/or lock this.

 

Let's talk about marketing. It's a widely known and accepted fact that every element in a franchise as renowned as Sonic the Hedgehog is conceived with the factor of marketability in mind; this includes settings, story lines, and most relevant to this discussion, characters. Every character has what is called a “primary demographic” and a “secondary demographic.” The primary demographic is whom the character is intended to appeal to. The secondary demographic, however, refers to the audience that the character was not meant to appeal to, but nevertheless becomes popular with. For example, diapers were obviously intended to appeal to babies around the age of one day old to four years old. That is their primary demographic, but that doesn't stop adults from buying them to wear on their heads.

 

. . .

 

. . .

 

Really? Just me?

 

Okay, actually the primary demographic would be adults who buy diapers for their children (ages 1 to 18 presumably), but this isn't about diapers or any other awesome head ornament for that matter. Let's look at some characters and examine them from a marketing standpoint before we ask the big question. Pun intended! (Also, anyone who is majoring or has majored in marketing can feel free to slap me in the face for getting my terms mixed up; I took one marketing class in high school and I barely remember it)

 

 

Let's start by examining the blue blur himself. To truly examine Sonic from a marketing standpoint, we must flashback to 1990 and think of the state of the medium from the perspective of the video game community circa twenty years ago. Modern gaming statistics state that just a little under half of today's gaming community comprises of female players, but back in the early 90's, the number of female players was significantly lower, as it was often perceived as a “boy's” hobby. Sure, every so often, there would be some sort of endeavor to appeal to younger girls by cashing in on popular “girl” franchises such as Barbie, but the cheap quality among other factors has sadly prevented any primarily female-intended games from every full taking off to this day.

 

With that said, I think it goes without saying that although he has gained a large following of female fans, Sonic was and has always been primarily aimed towards male players. But social differences aside, we can clearly see that he has the looks and attitude of a typical 90's action hero, which was a very popular thing amongst young boys back in the 90's. That being said, what age does Sonic appeal to? Well, I'd say probably around the range of 6 – 12 years, (unless you're playing Mario & Sonic at the Olympic Games, in which case, I'd say around the age group of six to twelve minutes) but I could be wrong.

 

Whatever the case, Sonic was clearly not intended for adults. Let's be honest here, SSMB. I know we all love Sonic... okay, I know that some of us love Sonic, but we have to face the cold, hard truth. We're in the secondary demographic. Sega couldn't care less about what we think as long as children keep buying their games. Does that mean they don't consider the opinion of the adult fanbase, or the female fanbase for that matter? Not at all. They do consider it, because they do want to satisfy as many demographics as they possibly can, but our demands will always be shoved aside in favor of its core demographic: Children, primarily boys, ages 6 – 12, and sometimes younger.

 

 

Tails is an interesting spectacle. We don't need to travel back to an earlier period in time to understand him, because his type of appeal is still clearly in effect today. Also, my time machine is broken, so stop bothering me about it. So let's just take a look at Tails from an aesthetic standpoint and ask ourselves, who do we think Tails would most appeal to?

 

Tails is probably the most unique of all the characters in this aspect because he does not have the gender barriers that other characters have. His cute aesthetics and childlike personality make him an instant favorite among younger boys and girls of the same age group. I'd say age-wise, he is mostly intended for the children under six, but that doesn't imply in even the slightest that he can't or shouldn't be enjoyed by the significantly older fanbase, whom I would dub as the secondary demographic for this character.

 

Let's mix things up a bit.

 

 

Amy Rose is a cute, crazy character. She could probably be best compared to characters such as Minnie Mouse, whose initial conception may have been to simply win over the female demographic with a female counterpart of the lead character while also providing a “damsel in distress.” She has thankfully somewhat deviated from this trope since the Adventure era and has established her own personality.

 

But I think it's clear that Amy has always been intended for the female demographic. I think many younger girls can relate to her girlhood crush on Sonic, which is exaggerated to comic extents. Unlike Tails, Amy was probably very much intended for the core 6 – 12 age group, though she can still prove to be a popular character in both the younger and older extremes.

 

 

. . .

 

. . .

 

Rouge has boobies. 'Nuff said.

 

Other interesting examples include Shadow, whose dark and brooding nature was intended for male players but has found a huge surge of popularity among the teenage girl demographic, and Cream, who serves as the female counterpart to Tails. But let's step away from Sonic and look at some other interesting examples.

 

 

Mew is the 151^st Pokémon in the Kanto and National Pokédex. Its small, catlike features and light color palette make it popular among younger children, primarily girls. (Note, I am not in any way saying that Mew isn't or can't be loved by older male fans as well, for it is very popular in that demographic as well.) You can see this relatively clearly.

 

 

Mewtwo, the 150^th Pokémon in the Kanto and National Pokédex, is a “superclone” of Mew. He boasts of a significantly darker color palette with a tougher build and a considerably more sinister and mysterious expression. His deep voice in the first movie seals the deal, indicating that he is definitely aimed primarily at older boys.

 

Non-important most recent movie spoilers below.

No I am not going to go on a rant about how the most recent movie gives Mewtwo a female voice. I actually find nothing wrong with it. I just think it's a little baffling that there exists more than one Mewtwo, but that's just me.

 

So, what am I trying to get at with this? Well, simply put, I'm merely attempting to demonstrate that every character—even those outside the Sonic series—have a clear demographic that doesn't require too much examination. Well, all except one character.

 

 

I'll admit that this thread initially started when I was going to post a series of status updates lampooning upon the character, but please note, this topic is not intended to harass Big the Cat. I did not type four pages worth of commercial analysis just to say, “Seriously, fuck Big.” As I was preparing to type the first of many statuses, I realized... this is actually a legitimate question. Who on earth does Big appeal to?

 

Aesthetically, he's kind of cute... I guess. He's a large, purple cat. But he doesn't have the same charm as, say Tails or Cream, that would win him over with the younger audiences, while at the same time, he doesn't have the same charisma and perception of depth that characters such as Shadow would use to win over older males and teenage girls. Maybe he was meant to appeal to... crazy cat ladies?

 

So okay, maybe his appeal is not in his aesthetics, but in his personality. Let's see, he's very slow-talking. He has a goofy voice, so he's clearly supposed to be comedic in some form. Hmm... nope, still got nothing.

 

His gameplay is the only thing that makes sense. It's only natural that the series would want to branch off with some sort of variety, and with the Dreamcast version of Sega Bass Fishing releasing the same year, it only made sense that they would want to cash in on their sports title with an unresponsive, broken, watered down, trashy emulation of the experience. Makes sense.

 

So basically, the only target demographic I can think of is people who like fishing and people who might be interested in buying games about fishing. I guess that makes sense, but that is such a broad demographic. Even actual fishing products have a specific demographic in mind when marketing their bait and gear. It isn't just “people who like fishing.”

 

 

Even Chris Thorndyke, as terrible of a character as he may be, is clearly supposed to be the character that younger kids can relate to.

 

So, my question for all the savvy marketers and general analysts and fans of SSMB is... who the hell is Big supposed to appeal to?! Oh, but let's not make it just about Big. If you can think of another character whose market appeal is just as ambiguous or more so, then feel free to post about him or her as well. I look forward to hearing your sarcastic and mean-spirited responses. =P

 

But seriously, fuck Big.

[Vertekins]

Big is simply an example of something Sonic Team wanted to do themselves and not specifically something to cater to what everyones typical expectations tend to be.

 

I liked that mannerism of Sonic Team to an extent. Nowadays it's practically non-existent due to pandering to what some people want instead of what they want to do

[Semi-colon e]

Wasn't the whole point of Big to be the contrast between Sonic and Tails and everyone else who is always rushing around, and have someone who's more slow and laid back? Big takes everything really slowly and doesn't seem to stress too much about anything. While it's probably true he doesn't have a specific "appeal", he's probably there to provide a contrast (as well as more cynically use the fishing thing).

 

Speaking of Pokemon, there are a wealth of Pokemon who seem gimmicky who don't have a specific appeal, such as Chatot which is meant to use the DS microphone, being similar to Big in that it's using the console's features and nothing more. However, it adds variety. Big's gameplay style, on the other hand, shouldn't have existed while Chatot is an optional Pokemon most people forget about, but still... I can't remember where I was going with this anymore.

[Mauro Fonseca]

Older players who can appreciate a life-goes-easy character, though he hasn't been done very well

[Jack / Joker]

... *sniff*

 

Well he appealed to me.

 

I think he's supposed to appeal to a few groups, his dumb and silly personality is probably supposed to be funny to younger children... it just hasn't been done very well. His laidback and easygoing side is probably set to appeal to people who can't be bothered with characters like Sonic's constant doing-of-things, an older audience perhaps? Again it's hard to say because they kinda screwed it up.

 

Personally I like to think he was supposed to be a contrast to the more "serious-business" characters like Tails, Knuckles, Gamma etc. and even Amy to a lesser extent who are always doing something dramatic with their cartoon animal selves. He just wants his frog back, man...

 

Like I said before, he appealed to me for what it's worth for reasons in the above paragraph. He's one of the... surprisingly few ridiculous cartoony animals in the series who is actually fun and not taking himself seriously.

 

RIP ya... worthless moron.

Edited July 23, 2013 by Μegatron

[azoo]

Yeah, Big is admirable because he takes things at his own pace. He's one of the background characters that, like Cream and Vanilla (and somewhat the Chaotix), is a bit closer to home than the more out-there main characters. Having characters like him helps balance out things some.

 

Plus, he's a fun character if/when written well. Other than his gameplay in SA1, why do we hate him again?

[SenEDDtor Missile]

Yeah, Big is admirable because he takes things at his own pace. He's one of the background characters that, like Cream and Vanilla (and somewhat the Chaotix), is a bit closer to home than the more out-there main characters. Having characters like him helps balance out things some.

 

Plus, he's a fun character if/when written well. Other than his gameplay in SA1, why do we hate him again?

"He is a friend, therefore we must hate his existence." - Most logic outside of this forum.

[Diogenes]

Who in the World is Big Meant to Appeal To?

Chill dudes who like to go with the flow and don't stress about being super-serious about everything. Or at least people who can appreciate stuff like that.

It's not the hugest of markets, he's never going to pull Shadow-level numbers, but it's hardly nothing.

It's like...he's a comedic character, but not so much in terms of explicit jokes (though there are some). He cuts the tension of the game by being an anomaly, a non-hero. Every character in SA has some kind of dramatic arc, some sort of character development by way of fighting robots and monsters, that we are supposed to take Very Seriously...except for Big. Big doesn't fight, he fishes. Big isn't trying to save the world, he's just trying to get his frog buddy back. Even his one boss is a total joke that can be beaten in seconds. Big, as a character, exists to say "chill out, it's just a game, have fun with it", which is something I think the series really ought to remember.

...it's just a shame he was such a pain to play as...

[Nepenthe]

Big is cute in his boundless simplicity and obliviousness. He's good for getting a smile out of the audience and easing tension, but that's about it. He's not bad, but he's not particularly great either, mainly because his overwhelming simplicity means there's very little places to take the character without exaggerating him to ridiculous levels a la Chronicles, or abandoning the very simplicity that makes him endearing. Big is probably never going to be that character that makes you misty-eyed or makes you want to cheer for him because that's just not his thing. His thing is: He has a frog, he loses the frog, he goes after the frog, he gets the frog back, he has a frog again. It's a simple story, but not a very compelling one.

 

Like Verte said though, Big wasn't made to cater to any specific audience (but probably rather to promote Sega Bass fishing or something). He's a character they made because they could make him and they found him endearing enough to devote time and money to, and ultimately whoever latched onto him was simply whoever latched onto him, which is a breath of fresh air compared to the more design-by-committee decisions we've been getting lately.

[TheOcelot]

Big basically comes across as an adorable cuddly toy. Little kids love him. His fishing gameplay in SA1 was a pain in the backside until you got used to it. Then it was fine. I loved his cameo's in SA2. Didn't Big have his biggest amount of dialogue in Heroes?

 

He was never an important character. But certainly no worse than Charmy Bee, Cream or Espio.

 

 

.....he's just so cute.

Edited July 23, 2013 by Sexy Ass -Bender-

[Nepenthe]

Whoa, what's wrong with Espio now?

[Diogenes]

Espio's a ninja dork.

[Nepenthe]

He's a ninja that's had no real moments to shine or outright embarrass himself. He just kinda exists, but at least he wasn't drug through the mud like Big was in Chronicles.

[Tara]

I'm going to say that I thought Big was sort of all right in SA1.  Namely, because they wrote his character to be simple, which compliments his slow dialect.

 

In Heroes, though, he is the most grating character, in my opinion.  His sentences should not be long and intricate, nor should you hear too much of it.  They should be short and to the point and rarely spoken, which they accomplished in the cutscenes, but not so during the gameplay.  Otherwise, his cameos in SA2 were pretty charming.  I haven't played Chronicles, so I don't know how much he bogs the experience in that, but he isn't a totally bad character.  He just hasn't been written well.

Edited July 23, 2013 by Akito

[Vertekins]

I haven't played Chronicles, so I don't know how much he bogs the experience in that, but he isn't a totally bad character.  He just hasn't been written well.

 

If you're curious about Big then for the love of God don't let Chronicles absolutely shambolic portrayal of him besmirch your view of him.

 

Dude's simpleness was so ridiculously flanderized that his dimness is morphed into outright stupidity and consumes almost all of his interactions. It's ironic when you consider the game's developers expressed desire to actually make him a more 'intelligent' character yet accomplished the exact opposite. Poor Big stands-out as the most mutilated character next to Sonic.

[Tara]

If you're curious about Big then for the love of God don't let Chronicles absolutely shambolic portrayal of him besmirch your view of him.

 

Dude's simpleness was so ridiculously flanderized that his dimness is morphed into outright stupidity and consumes almost all of his interactions. It's ironic when you consider the game's developers expressed desire to actually make him a more 'intelligent' character yet accomplished the exact opposite. Poor Big stands-out as the most mutilated character next to Sonic.

I've already made a note that when/if I play Chronicles, it should not be used as a model for integral or even good writing of any characters in the Sonic series, with Big being of no exception. =P

[Uraraka]

I think Big was made to appeal to the same audience as Wario ....

  Actually, I heard it was a last ditch effort to include one of Japan's most popular sports in their Sonic game.... Fishing

[Carbo]

I'm not sure "laid back" justifies what role Big serves. I love laid back characters, in fact when it comes to characters I love this particular trope the best if they end up contributing to whatever medium they serve. Big still feels completely pointless and useless as a character.

From a game play and narrative perspective in Adventure it's clear that he was shoehorned in for the sake of padding the game out and requiring another MacGuffin that isn't readily explained either or even evaluated upon. Not only is his game play a stark contrast towards everything presented in the game but having that particular facet in game play be represented by someone who's essentially a dumb oaf barely helps his cause as being at worst aggravating and at best completely pointless.

I'd almost say he was a perfect representation of Sonic Team themselves in terms of contrived and pointless game decisions - lazy and padded. It's not a matter of catering to anyone's tastes, he's an answer to a question no one asked.

[DocAzure]

Yeah, I thought Big just existed to push in a useless fishing gimmick that nobody...NOBODY asked for. It shows because he adds literally nothing to the story, and he comes across as a bad attempt at padding.

 

It's sad to say, but Big was only created as an attempt to increase the length of the game. A bad one at that.

Edited July 23, 2013 by DocAzure

[Match]

Big always struck me as really awkward comic relief.

I always thought he was funny because he's just this huge fucking cat who has no business being in this world full of zippy little animals. Among the drama and world-ending prophecies of SA1, there's just this fat, lazy, pants-on-his-head stupid cat looking for his pet frog. And everything about him reflects that. He has a stereotypical "dumb guy" voice, he's large and clumsy, and he has very little grasp on the gravity of his meddling in the main story. He's just passing through, thank you very much.

Edited July 23, 2013 by Global Warming in Ice Cap

[Diogenes]

Man can't a thing just be for fun?

Does everything in a game need to be absolutely vital to be justified? So what if Big isn't necessary to the story! I think his part in it is interesting.

[DocAzure]

Well, my argument is, if I want to play SEGA Bass Fishing, I'll play fucking SEGA Bass Fishing.

 

I don't want to jump into a Sonic game known for, y'know...SPEED, and go fishing.

Edited July 23, 2013 by DocAzure

[Tara]

Big always struck me as really awkward comic relief.

I always thought he was funny because he's just this huge fucking cat who has no business being in this world full of zippy little animals. Among the drama and world-ending prophecies of SA1, there's just this fat, lazy, pants-on-his-head stupid cat looking for his pet frog. And everything about him reflects that. He has a stereotypical "dumb guy" voice, he's large and clumsy, and he has very little grasp on the gravity of his meddling in the main story. He's just passing through, thank you very much.

I always thought that they could have used that to his advantage.  That could have made some great comic relief, but...

 

Man can't a thing just be for fun?

Does everything in a game need to be absolutely vital to be justified? So what if Big isn't necessary to the story! I think his part in it is interesting.

...it would have been more fun if his actions actually did have some sort of weight on the story.  Like, his attempts to find Froggy set off something major without him being aware of it.  That would have been hilarious and I wouldn't have minded his presence were that the case.

[Vertekins]

...it would have been more fun if his actions actually did have some sort of weight on the story.  Like, his attempts to find Froggy set off something major without him being aware of it.  That would have been hilarious and I wouldn't have minded his presence were that the case.

Big's funny attempt to pilot the Tornado 2 and then crashing it was wholly relevant in Super Sonic's story in which Chaos discovers the emerald inside the plane. So saying that he's completely irrelevant to the narrative is false.

[Tara]

Big's funny attempt to pilot the Tornado 2 and then crashing it was wholly relevant in Super Sonic's story in which Chaos discovers the emerald inside the plane.

Oh, yes, forgot about that. ^^; But that's still just one scene out of the whole story.