Do you think the series is better with Sonic as the only playable character?

[Mr. Taxi]

Other things can add replayability too though, not just extra characters, for example more unlockables (like a secret level for all red rings) more artwork and music (where was my sound test colours!) more extra paths that intertwine so you can play a different route every level.

 

 

Then again a bigger roster has inherent replay value. Artwork and music... doesn't.

 

Extra playable characters are a good choice to increase replay value because they have inherent replay value as long as they are variations of Sonic's gameplay and in Sonic's levels. If they have completely different and obligatory gameplay, no - they're part of the "core" experience, which is kinda annoying to have fragmented.

 

But, while I think the lack of other playable characters is wasted potential (it wouldn't be if Sonic had never had other playable characters, but since it did, we know what it's like), they aren't really necessary. Just a nice thing to have. And I wouldn't want them to be handled as complete deviations of the gamplay we're looking for the most, which Sonic Team seems liking to do.

Edited August 15, 2013 by Palas

[Jolt_TH]

. And I'd be completely against extra paths as unlockables. If you're supposed to play a different route each time, you don't really need to be outright denied of other possibilities, since the concept of "path" is (supposed to be) ours, not the game's. Just give us all the paths right away and extra levels, if it's the case.

Ahh I worded that really wrong sorry!

I didn't mean for the paths to be unlockable but more like have lots of different paths in the level so you could do exactly that and explore. like having a shortcut that could intertwine with a DIFFERENT shortcut and then if you wanted deviated onto the main path again or onto the alternate path

[Mr. Taxi]

Ahh I worded that really wrong sorry!

I didn't mean for the paths to be unlockable but more like have lots of different paths in the level so you could do exactly that and explore. like having a shortcut that could intertwine with a DIFFERENT shortcut and then if you wanted deviated onto the main path again or onto the alternate path

 

I'm so sorry for misinterpreting. I'll remove that.

[Potada]

Wasn't there a similar thread to this one? Eh, well.

 

Personally, I like having the semi-variety that S3K had. I know it's not really necessary story or initial gameplay-wise, but it would offer a little more replayability. Sure, the wisps might be able to give Sonic all sorts of options on his own, but the time limit they each have makes it just as limited as having multiple characters. (Unless they're one of those re-spawning capsules, of course. )

 

Actually, now that I think about it, having both wisps and multiple characters could have some interesting results.

Edited August 15, 2013 by Potada

[Kuzu]

Ya know, I'd stomach playing as Sonic only if the games didn't insist on cock teasing with their appearances in the plot. Most of the responses I've heard people in this topic insist that they're "not needed" but so then what is the point of them even being in the game in the first place? If Sonic is truly the only character who matters in the end, then there's no reason for anyone else to show up ever again because he can just do everything by himself. But no, people still want their favorite characters to appear but don't care if they aren't playable, its bullshit to me.

 

Its one thing with characters like the Chaotix who never had a large role in the first place, but then its another issue when Tails is with Sonic for the entirety of the game, and I'm still not able to play as him. That is beyond stupid. 

 

 

Are the other characters actually needed? Of course not, but then if Sega just up and removed every single character aside from Sonic, Tails, and Eggman I guarantee damn near all of you would be upset. Its like people want to have their cake but refuse to eat it. If other characters are going to play a major role in the plot, then make them fucking playable, its been done in the past and there's no reason they can't do it again. Otherwise, if they insist with keeping Sonic as the only character available, then just get rid of everybody except him & Eggman.

Edited August 15, 2013 by Azure Yakuzu

[Shikushi]

I'd love other characters, but they should have the same speed and basic abilities as Sonic, but with some unique moves like flying, climbing and stuff like that.

[Sonic The Badass]

Other characters= different types of gameplay and better story telling (diffrent stories that collide into one).

[Diogenes]

But no, people still want their favorite characters to appear but don't care if they aren't playable, its bullshit to me.

I don't need a character to be playable to appreciate them. Eggman has almost never been playable, but he's one of my favorite characters in the series. I like Marine, even though she was never playable. I liked Big being a weird cameo character more than I liked playing as him in SA. And conversely, it's not like Silver being playable ever made me give a shit about him.

A character simply doesn't need to be playable to be important, memorable, worthwhile, interesting, etc.

[Wraith]

There have been a lot of plot relevant characters that assisted Sonic without being playable. The idea that a character has to be playable to be worth giving a damn about is ridiculous. 

[Kuzu]

I don't need a character to be playable to appreciate them. Eggman has almost never been playable, but he's one of my favorite characters in the series. I like Marine, even though she was never playable. I liked Big being a weird cameo character more than I liked playing as him in SA. And conversely, it's not like Silver being playable ever made me give a shit about him.

A character simply doesn't need to be playable to be important, memorable, worthwhile, interesting, etc.

 

While that may be true, would having someone else to play as really be that bad? Eggman is the antagonist, his chances at being playable are slim to none, and Eggman's role has never needed him to be playable in the first place. Marine has appeared only once, and Big has been actively phased out of the series which goes back to my point of if this character is truly isn't needed, then they just should not appear. But that's not the case, these characters keep on appearing because Sega feels they are indeed important but don't feel they should actually make them playable.

 

The logic that a character doesn't need to be playable to be important works a lot better when they're appearances are limited, or one shots only. That logic however goes out of the window when this character is given recurring appearances and still not given playable status.

There have been a lot of plot relevant characters that assisted Sonic without being playable. The idea that a character has to be playable to be worth giving a damn about is ridiculous. 

 

Yes, and how many of those characters are even still around? Chip isn't coming back anytime soon, neither is Shahra, Caliburn, Marine, Big or any of them. Yet its ridiculous to want the recurring characters to be playable?

[Mando-Whirl-Wind]

Well the great thing about multiple  characters is that it gives you a chance to see the story from different perspectives, thats one of the things I loved about sonic adventure, you got to see ALL sides of the story, and the different playstyles is great too

[Wraith]

 

Yes, and how many of those characters are even still around? Chip isn't coming back anytime soon, neither is Shahra, Caliburn, Marine, Big or any of them. Yet its ridiculous to want the recurring characters to be playable?

 

 

Okay, back up. I never said it was ridiculous to want recurring characters playable. You've been making assumptions about what people are saying and jumping down their throat for it this whole time.

 

I was saying that this:

 

If other characters are going to play a major role in the plot, then make them fucking playable, its been done in the past and there's no reason they can't do it again. Otherwise, if they insist with keeping Sonic as the only character available, then just get rid of everybody except him & Eggman.

 

is ridiculous. Tails can easily play a good role in a game without being playable. Him not being playable doesn't actually make anything he does in the game meaningless. Same goes for the others. Them being playable isn't their only reason for existing. Especially when it's something like the boost games where actually putting them in and doing them justice would be much more difficult due to the style being basically built around a speed based character's abilities. 

[Diogenes]

While that may be true, would having someone else to play as really be that bad?

I'm not against other playable characters appearing, mind. I just don't see it as a necessity. 

The logic that a character doesn't need to be playable to be important works a lot better when they're appearances are limited, or one shots only. That logic however goes out of the window when this character is given recurring appearances and still not given playable status.

No, it works just fine, whether a character appears once or 100 times. Mega Man games don't need to make Roll and Dr. Light (or Rush or Eddie or Beat or Auto) playable just because they've been around a lot. Some characters exist as support, or flavor, or worldbuilding, or any number of other roles that don't require, or possibly even benefit from, them being playable.

[Kuzu]

Okay, back up. I never said it was ridiculous to want recurring characters playable. You've been making assumptions about what people are saying and jumping down their throat for it this whole time.

 

I was saying that this:

 

 

is ridiculous. Tails can easily play a good role in a game without being playable. Him not being playable doesn't actually make anything he does in the game meaningless. Same goes for the others. Them being playable isn't their only reason for existing. Especially when it's something like the boost games where actually putting them in and doing them justice would be much more difficult due to the style being basically built around a speed based character's abilities.

 

Its not ridiculous when that's how the series worked in the past. Almost every time a character played a major role in a game, they'd be given playable status along with it, so how is it ridiculous to expect that to be the case in this day and age? 

 

Of course a character doesn't need to be playable to play a major role, but I consider it a massive cocktease when that is the case because then there's really no reason for me to not be playing at this character. Can you honestly give me a convincing reason why I can't play as Tails in the past four games, despite his supposed importance?

 

I'm not against other playable characters appearing, mind. I just don't see it as a necessity.

Of course its not a necessity, does that mean the series just should do without it?

 

No, it works just fine, whether a character appears once or 100 times. Mega Man games don't need to make Roll and Dr. Light (or Rush or Eddie or Beat or Auto) playable just because they've been around a lot. Some characters exist as support, or flavor, or worldbuilding, or any number of other roles that don't require, or possibly even benefit from, them being playable.

Mega Man has been the sole playable character from the start in his series, with Proto Man and Bass making one or two appearances since then. Tails & Knuckles have had more playable appearances in the past decade, so naturally veterans of the series would be a little shocked when their playability just stops.

[Diogenes]

Of course its not a necessity, does that mean the series just should do without it?

If you're going to flip your shit over characters showing up but not being playable, maybe it should, so you can detox a bit.

Mega Man has been the sole playable character from the start in his series,

This doesn't make one iota of difference.

[Wraith]

 

Its not ridiculous when that's how the series worked in the past. Almost every time a character played a major role in a game, they'd be given playable status along with it, so how is it ridiculous to expect that to be the case in this day and age? 

 

Of course a character doesn't need to be playable to play a major role, but I consider it a massive cocktease when that is the case because then there's really no reason for me to not be playing at this character. Can you honestly give me a convincing reason why I can't play as Tails in the past four games, despite his supposed importance?

 

 

Considering the Sonic series switches gears completely more often than any other series I know, "That's how it worked in the past." isn't really a valid argument considering how many gameplay styles alone we've been through. 

 

You also have to keep in mind that implementing characters isn't a simple process. The only game I would say it would be easy to implement Tails into without massive restructuring of the level design to make sure his flight doesn't break it open completely is Sonic Lost World. 

[Kuzu]

If you're going to flip your shit over characters showing up but not being playable, maybe it should, so you can detox a bit.

So then please tell me how am I unreasonable in wanting to play as someone else? Am I truly wrong for wanting Tails to at least be playable given his appearances beside Sonic for four games in a row?

 

This doesn't make one iota of difference.

Capcom have made very few chances for other playable characters in their series, Sonic Team by comparison have tried to accommodate for other characters since 1994. Nobody expects other characters in Mega Man because the series has never really tried to do so, while Sonic Team has for years, so naturally when they just stop, its a little bit jarring.

And even then, despite his current status Mega Man has made more of an attempt at utilizing other characters in his last two games than Sonic Team have in their last four.

Considering the Sonic series switches gears completely more often than any other series I know, "That's how it worked in the past." isn't really a valid argument considering how many gameplay styles alone we've been through. 

 

You also have to keep in mind that implementing characters isn't a simple process. The only game I would say it would be easy to implement Tails into without massive restructuring of the level design to make sure his flight doesn't break it open completely is Sonic Lost World. 

 

We just literally went to a new style with Lost World from the boost trilogy, so that argument doesn't really work either. And if recent comments from Iizuka are anything to go by, they're gonna keep on switching gears. 

 

And yet he isn't playable in Lost World, so what's the excuse now? And even if I did buy that excuse, they should at least try. Experiment, playtest, see what works and what doesn't. If something doesn't work, you fix it until it does not just give up on it and just say "screw it"

[Diogenes]

So then please tell me how am I unreasonable in wanting to play as someone else?

You're unreasonable for freaking out over the idea that other people might not care as much as you about it.

e: also for suggesting that anyone who isn't playable isn't worth keeping around

Edited August 15, 2013 by Diogenes

[Wraith]

We just literally went to a new style with Lost World from the boost trilogy, so that argument doesn't really work either. And if recent comments from Iizuka are anything to go by, they're gonna keep on switching gears. 

 

And yet he isn't playable in Lost World, so what's the excuse now? And even if I did buy that excuse, they should at least try. Experiment, playtest, see what works and what doesn't. If something doesn't work, you fix it until it does not just give up on it and just say "screw it"

 

If I recall correctly, Iizuka simply said the parkour wasn't set in stone. Probably to keep everyone from getting pissy if it ends up not working when the game is released. People liked the wisps, so they'll stay. If people like Parkour, it'll stay. It's simple.

 

How do you even know if they DID try and experiment with it and it just didn't work so they didn't bother putting it in the games? You don't release broken gameplay to the public.

Edited August 15, 2013 by i love felix

[Kuzu]

You're unreasonable for freaking out over the idea that other people might not care as much as you about it.

So because other people don't care, I shouldn't care about it either. That's some pretty biased thinking.

 

If you don't care if anyone else is playable, fine. But don't try to convince me I'm wrong for caring just because you don't.

 

e: also for suggesting that anyone who isn't playable isn't worth keeping around

I said if they aren't going to make anyone else playable, that they shouldn't be trying make them so important in the context of the game in the first place. Do the games truly need all of these characters when only one of them is relevant?

 

 

If I recall correctly, Iizuka simply said the parkour wasn't set in stone. Probably to keep everyone from getting pissy if it ends up not working when the game is released. People liked the wisps, so they'll stay. If people like Parkour, it'll stay. It's simple.

 

How do you even know if they DID try and experiment with it and it just didn't work so they didn't bother putting it in the games? You don't release broken gameplay to the public.

 

People liked the Boost gameplay, and they had no problem axing that. Quite a few people here didn't like the Wisp, and yet they're still keeping that. Meaning you have no guarantee that they'll keep Parkour even if it is liked.

 

Neither of us know, but the bottom line is; Tails still isn't playable, so how many more excuses am I going to have to hear for having Sonic only again?

Edited August 15, 2013 by Azure Yakuzu

[Diogenes]

So because other people don't care, I shouldn't care about it either. That's some pretty biased thinking.

Yeah it's also not what I said at all.

I said if they aren't going to make anyone else playable, that they shouldn't be trying make them so important in the context of the game in the first place. Do the games truly need all of these characters when only one of them is relevant?

A character isn't irrelevant simply because they aren't playable. You don't even believe this bullshit, since you wouldn't say Eggman is irrelevant even though he isn't playable.

[Kuzu]

Yeah it's also not what I said at all.

You just finished telling me that I was being unreasonable for caring about something that other people might not care about.

Unless you meant something else, I'm pretty sure that translates to; "Since I don't care about it, so neither should you"

 

 

 

 

A character isn't irrelevant simply because they aren't playable. You don't even believe this bullshit, since you wouldn't say Eggman is irrelevant even though he isn't playable.

Because Eggman is the ANTAGONIST, nobody ever expects him to be playable because he almost never is. Tails however generally gets top billing after Sonic so its not out there to assume that some people would kind of come to expect to play as him.

 

 

And at this point I'm left wondering what are you trying to convince me of, you've already explained that you don't really care if other characters aren't playable and that they aren't a necessity, and I explained how I feel the opposite about the former. Its pretty obvious we're not going to see eye to eye on this, so I don't see why you're arguing over something as simple as a difference in opinion.

[Diogenes]

You just finished telling me that I was being unreasonable for caring about something that other people might not care about.

You're unreasonable for freaking out that other people don't care as much as you, not for you caring at all.

Because Eggman is the ANTAGONIST,

So fucking what? He's not playable, he's still relevant, the entire basis for your argument is nonsense. A supporting hero can still be important even if they aren't playable. A completely optional NPC can be worthwhile even if they aren't playable. Throwing out characters entirely just because they aren't playable is nonsense, plain and simple.

[Wraith]

 

 

People liked the Boost gameplay, and they had no problem axing that. Quite a few people here didn't like the Wisp, and yet they're still keeping that. Meaning you have no guarantee that they'll keep Parkour even if it is liked.

 

Neither of us know, but the bottom line is; Tails still isn't playable, so how many more excuses am I going to have to hear for having Sonic only again?

The boost gameplay was very restrictive and could easily fall into stagnation because of that. Most of us agree on this yet we're questioning them for getting rid of it?

 

 

Like I said, it's not a think that makes or breaks a game, so I could see why they're not exactly going out of their way to implement it instead of focusing on their new style. Again, before you take this the wrong way, I'm not saying they SHOULDN'T be playable, but they are not a necessity nor will their playability necessarily improve the game. It's not like they're hiding behind excuses or going out of the way to not include it. They're just plain not focusing on it. 

[Kuzu]

You're unreasonable for freaking out that other people don't care as much as you, not for you caring at all.

 

I'm "freaking out" because you seem hell bent on convincing me of my "wrongness" on this situation.

 

 

 

quote]So fucking what? He's not playable, he's still relevant, the entire basis for your argument is nonsense. A supporting hero can still be important even if they aren't playable. A completely optional NPC can be worthwhile even if they aren't playable. Throwing out characters entirely just because they aren't playable is nonsense, plain and simple.

And I consider it a massive cocktease to have all of these characters around, when I can only play as one of them.Yes, a supporting hero can be important if they aren't playable. Yes, a completely optional NPC can be worthwhile even if they aren't playable. But you keep missing my point and what you still haven't answered is why can't they be playable on top of all of that? You keep going back to Eggman while completely ignoring the rest of the cast; I'm not speaking about one specific character, I'm speaking in general. 

Having an important recurring character not be playable, unless its justified, still doesn't make sense to me.Particularly when they've been playable in the past.

 

The boost gameplay was very restrictive and could easily fall into stagnation because of that. Most of us agree on this yet we're questioning them for getting rid of it?

And everyone here who was actively against that wanted Sonic Team to "Fix" the boost gameplay, so what happened to that?

 

 

 

 

Like I said, it's not a think that makes or breaks a game, so I could see why they're not exactly going out of their way to implement it instead of focusing on their new style. Again, before you take this the wrong way,I'm not saying they SHOULDN'T be playable, but they are not a necessity nor will their playability necessarily improve the game. It's not like they're hiding behind excuses or going out of the way to not include it. They're just plain not focusing on it.

OK, that's all you had to say. They don't want to, I may not agree with it, but I can deal with that statement a lot better instead of people keep telling me a different excuse for why they haven't done so already.

Edited August 15, 2013 by Azure Yakuzu