Jump to content
Awoo.

What's The Best Way To Introduce A New Anthro Character?


Dee Dude

Recommended Posts

Hoo boy...New characters... Quite controversial when it comes to this franchise (then again what isn't).

We all know where major cast members (Big,Omega,Blaze,Silver etc) went as far as reception goes as well as one shot characters (Emerl,Elise,Shahra, Merlina,Chip etc) with their respective titles who are gone but not forgotten.

Now, the thing is... why is it that almost every time a new character is introduced to the series, their reputation just never seems live up to the general's expectation? I mean Big is hated immensely due to his slow,difficult,and tedious fishing levels and dimwitted Froggy obsessed personality. Silver was hated because of his cheap and unfair boss fight, naivety, being another hedgehog and of course the fact that he debuted in a horribly flawed and loathed game. and don't even get me started on the Deadly Six who were fairly disliked because of their extremely cliche personalities, cheap boss fights and the fact they came out of NOWHERE with no backstory whatsoever.

Yeah you get my point but we're not here about every new character, I made this topic to discuss about new ANTRHO characters.

You know....the talking animals.....the ones who wear shoes and gloves...........Mobians.

It's been years since we had a new animal character introduced to the main franchise, the latest one being Marine who debuted in Sonic Rush Adventure (2007) who has never appeared again since, but it's most likely because SEGA doesn't know what to do with her so they probably scrapped her. 

Yes, I know i know, it's better to focus on already existing characters to flesh them out and re-establish them before creating even newer ones definitely a bigger priority and i know you might also think Sonic has enough characters already but is that really an issue? I mean many video game series such as Street Fighter and yes, even the Mario series have hundreds if not thousands of characters so i don't see why that's an issue with Sonic, going on for years without any new characters could get the series to be very stale and boring, new characters are made to keep things fresh and you get to learn more about their personality, abilities etc and there's so much potential to use in terms of and species and design.

Look before you say anything, I'm not begging for new characters nor am i asking SEGA to constantly make them, I'm just curious see if SEGA could take the time to learn their mistakes from past character and utilize that to potentially create a genuinely good character that could actually leave a GOOD impression on the fandom.

Which leads to this discussion, What do you believe the is the proper way to successfully introduce a well written animal character to the series and make a good impact on it?  

 

Edited by Dan-Dude
  • Thumbs Up 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not very picky, so I'd just say to give me someone with an interesting design, and an uncommon species (Like, idk, Ocelot, Kangaroo, Mongoose?) and I'll probably like them! I like how the Sonic series has made characters out of animals that aren't always seen as popular or well known.

But I'm not a good frame of reference. ^^;

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think instead of introducing new characters they should get characters like Shadow right again. Shadow could be a really cool character and he was pretty neat in Adventure 2. I'd rather them get fan-favourite characters done right rather than bring the fresh blood in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I feel like this applies more to fan characters than official ones (though let's face it, some do suffer from this), I feel like it's important to note that a character shouldn't just be a vehicle for as many ridiculous superpowers as you can think of - the majority of them can get by with spinning and a unique physical talent or two (Knux is a boxer, Amy wields a hammer, Tails can fly etc). And if you insist on giving them superpowers beyond that, it's important that they at least follow a distinct theme so their limitations are neatly defined from the get-go (Blaze has fire powers, Silver is Telekinetic, and so on). Thankfully, most of the characters that suffer from this are either dead, retired or Shadow, so it's at least winded down since the days of '06.

Speaking of this though:

Yes, I know i know, it's better to focus on already existing characters to flesh them out and re-establish them before creating even newer ones definitely a bigger priority and i know you might also think Sonic has enough characters already but is that really an issue? I mean many video game series such as Street Fighter and yes, even the Mario series have hundreds if not thousands of characters so i don't see why that's an issue with Sonic, going on for years without any new characters could get the series to be very stale and boring, new characters are made to keep things fresh and you get to learn more about their personality, abilities etc and there's so much potential to use in terms of and species and design.

These comparisons are scarcely even relevant to Sonic's case. Mario barely even has a narrative to wrap around its cast bloat, let alone an expanded cast beyond Luigi and a few Toads that show up consistently, so focusing on quantity alone is really missing the point of what makes it work. Similarly, Street Fighter is, well, a fighting game, that genre that prides itself on mechanics over narrative to the point that over half the cast is literally irrelevant to whatever the greater plot of the game is. And for the most part I still couldn't tell you what that is because almost nothing is explained over the course of gameplay, and what does happen is often immediately retconned in the next game anyway. The point is, the franchises are set up in such a way that excuse plots aren't even necessary - Mario is literally "rescue the princess just because" and Street Fighter is literally "beat up your friends just because".

Meanwhile people get their panties in a knot if Knuckles appears without so much as a mention of the Master Emerald, much less a brand new character that only exists because "but other franchises have lots of characters too!!!". And I'd hate to sound like a broken record because I say this all the goddamned time: we're in an era where it's really important that Sonic regains a lot of lost consistency, and that means keeping characters as consistent mainstays where applicable, not making new ones to cover tiny niches in a cast which basically already has something for everything. If characters are getting boring and stale, that's a problem with your writing, not the character itself.

  • Thumbs Up 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys are missing the point of this topic, This is more of a hypothetical discussion rather than a petty request I made.

Blacklighting I do agree with you but you're kind of misinterpreting what I'm stating, I'll admit Mario and Street Fighters were bad examples of this character argument but you should understand the point I was making, I'm not saying that Sonic should bloated with billions of new characters but the hypothetical question on a new character being well written to series and leaving a impression, it doesn't have to happen  but I made this discussion to hear your thoughts on this,

And you said about abilities was spot on but I didn't say characters should have a bunch of "zomg super epic ultra he can go ssj100!" powers. What you said about characters having one ability with a theme to it is exactly how characters should be handled. Not trying to be mean but try not to put words in my mouth.

Edited by Dan-Dude
  • Thumbs Up 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I know i know, it's better to focus on already existing characters to flesh them out and re-establish them before creating even newer ones definitely a bigger priority and i know you might also think Sonic has enough characters already but is that really an issue?

It is definitely an issue given the way the series has usually handled its characters. Any time some new furry character is introduced, they're bound to be treated like a main character, either being playable, being a major part of the story, or both. And if they were playable and not explicitly dead by the end of the game, there was a good chance they'd stick around to be playable again. It pretty quickly got to a point where all these "important" characters were jostling for attention, each getting less as the cast expanded, and some of them showing up for no reason but apparent obligation given how little they contributed.

Mario, on the other hand, knows how to let go. How many "main" Mario characters are there now, 30 years after his creation? Mario, Luigi, Peach, Bowser, maybe Bowser Jr...and already things start to get vague. Yoshi's common but not really seen as required and is usually more of a powerup than a character. There's usually a couple Toads running around, but even the few named ones haven't stuck around consistently, and I doubt anyone will be mourning the loss of Yellow Toad from the console NSMBs. Rosalina's been popular lately, but I honestly couldn't guess if she'll be relevant in any future games. Any of the other "hundreds" of characters? Haha, nah. Most of them we'll never see again. And while it can suck to not see a character you liked again, I don't think it's a bad way to go about it. The characters serve out the purpose they were intended for, and when they're not needed, the series moves on from them.

...I guess that's my answer. We don't need any more main characters, at least not any time soon. If this series is going to make more characters, it needs to learn to make ones that it can let go of.

  • Thumbs Up 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems to me that one essential policy is to have a clear plan for what they're going to do with that character after that game.  Either the character should be designed to be wrapped up in that game and never return again, or they should be designed to make it easy for them to return with any hypothetical future game being compatible with them.  Notably, Sega has, actually, gotten much better about this, and most new characters introduced since maybe Unleashed or so have been designed and utilised as one-shots.  Chip was clearly never intended to return, and never has.  Ditto Marine; she has no reason to return, and indeed hasn't.  Contrast to Shadow, who they brought back despite having intended him to be a one-game character, and Silver, who they clearly intended to be a big deal but haven't done anything significant with since.  Both are at the centre of much criticism of the series.

  • Thumbs Up 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is definitely an issue given the way the series has usually handled its characters. Any time some new furry character is introduced, they're bound to be treated like a main character, either being playable, being a major part of the story, or both. And if they were playable and not explicitly dead by the end of the game, there was a good chance they'd stick around to be playable again. It pretty quickly got to a point where all these "important" characters were jostling for attention, each getting less as the cast expanded, and some of them showing up for no reason but apparent obligation given how little they contributed.

Mario, on the other hand, knows how to let go. How many "main" Mario characters are there now, 30 years after his creation? Mario, Luigi, Peach, Bowser, maybe Bowser Jr...and already things start to get vague. Yoshi's common but not really seen as required and is usually more of a powerup than a character. There's usually a couple Toads running around, but even the few named ones haven't stuck around consistently, and I doubt anyone will be mourning the loss of Yellow Toad from the console NSMBs. Rosalina's been popular lately, but I honestly couldn't guess if she'll be relevant in any future games. Any of the other "hundreds" of characters? Haha, nah. Most of them we'll never see again. And while it can suck to not see a character you liked again, I don't think it's a bad way to go about it. The characters serve out the purpose they were intended for, and when they're not needed, the series moves on from them.

...I guess that's my answer. We don't need any more main characters, at least not any time soon. If this series is going to make more characters, it needs to learn to make ones that it can let go of.

Agreed, but it wouldn't easy to pull off, you'd have to make the character really unlikable, have an ugly/lazy/unappealing design,extremely annoying and overall a complete vile scum bag who needs to die. But that doesn't necessarily have to be the case when you got characters like Gamma and Chip who've made friends, sacrificed themselves, completed their goals and sadly were never seen again. It wouldn't be fair to completely axe a character you really enjoyed if SEGA saw that they they had potential and thus had no reason to get rid of them unless their entire character arc and purpose was finished.

Edited by Dan-Dude
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed, but it wouldn't easy to pull off, you'd have to make the character really unlikable, have an ugly/lazy/unappealing design,extremely annoying and overall a complete vile scum bag who needs to die.

...what are you talking about? That has nothing to do with anything I said.

It wouldn't be fair to completely axe a character you really enjoyed if SEGA saw that they they had potential and thus had no reason to get rid of them unless their entire character arc and purpose was finished.

Man I'm tired of hearing about "potential". At this point saying something has "potential" may as well just be shorthand for "I don't want to let this thing go". If Sonic Team has an actual, genuine purpose for a character then sure, keep them around, but unspecified "potential" can get fucked as far as I'm concerned. 

  • Thumbs Up 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Man I'm tired of hearing about "potential". At this point saying something has "potential" may as well just be shorthand for "I don't want to let this thing go". If Sonic Team has an actual, genuine purpose for a character then sure, keep them around, but unspecified "potential" can get fucked as far as I'm concerned. 

it does sound that way your right. But saying it doesn't have potential means also I hate it and it can fuck off. ;p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd try to tie the character in to an existing character/plot point. Maybe as many as possible. Is it any wonder why there are so many Shadow prototypes/couple love children/etc in the fandom? I would also try and grant them a good playstyle. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

...what are you talking about? That has nothing to do with anything I said.

Man I'm tired of hearing about "potential". At this point saying something has "potential" may as well just be shorthand for "I don't want to let this thing go". If Sonic Team has an actual, genuine purpose for a character then sure, keep them around, but unspecified "potential" can get fucked as far as I'm concerned. 

You said that you'd have to let a new character go so I figured that said new character would have very negative traits so no one would miss him/her

That's what potential is bro.<_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do think that they should stop making characters for a while for the main games until they can use the ones they have. Which they dont know how to use.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

...what are you talking about? That has nothing to do with anything I said.

Man I'm tired of hearing about "potential". At this point saying something has "potential" may as well just be shorthand for "I don't want to let this thing go". If Sonic Team has an actual, genuine purpose for a character then sure, keep them around, but unspecified "potential" can get fucked as far as I'm concerned. 

I've kind of been dreading this since I joined TSS, but here I go. I honestly think you're probably the one person I've been most scared of arguing with, because your arguments are really good at shutting down any thoughts I have and I usually can't figure out how to respond to your rebuttals. Thanks for challenging my opinions in an honestly, very sound, logical manner.

I might be putting words in other people's mouths, and I really hope that's not what I'm doing, but I think when people blabber on about potential, they mean that certain characters have traits about them (whether gameplay or narrative-wise) that can be utilized in the future to expand the scope of Sonic's world as a whole, as well as provide a refreshing game-specific hook to make a title stand out more. For example, take a character like Marine the Racoon. Thus far, her only appearance has been in Rush Adventure to provide a foil to Blaze's personality and serve to Tails what Blaze is to Sonic and/or Knuckles, a young bundle of energy who wants to emulate her hero but in turn, become their own person capable of holding their own in the efforts to keep the world safe. Unlike Tails though, Marine's maturation as a character has not been completed yet, which gives her a reason to come back. Therefore, her "potential" lies in any future installments where Blaze's dimension becomes a main focus. Imagine what possible routes she can take that can affect both story and gameplay. She can either become more like Tails, becoming a resident mechanic who helps the main heroes in traversing the ocean and rest of the dimension, or heck, maybe she can finally make some progress to making her dream a reality, becoming a full-fledged ship captain, and is then thrust into a position where she can be seen as an equal, rather than a subservient to Sonic and Blaze. This is what people mean by "potential," and for many people, it's a really exciting prospect to consider.

I understand where your frustration lies though (or at least, I think I do), in regards to seeing other people see potential in characters that don't really have any potential at all. Shadow is a really good example, as his story arc basically finished with the incredibly lackluster spinoff game, officially putting the past behind him and choosing to move on with his life. The problem with pulling more potential out of Shadow is that his character was so closely connected with his past, and now that he's let it go, he's just a basic stick in the mud compared to everyone else. I mean sure, if SEGA really wanted to, they could do stuff with his employment for GUN or having to deal with consequences of letting go of the past, so that side of his character can become relevant again, but it'll be very difficult to not make such a move look forced; it'd basically appear like an act of desperation to keep a fan-favorite character in the spotlight, and I don't know if anybody really wants that.

Edited by Writer's Blah
  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at it like that, is there really any character that doesn't have "potential"? Even though you said Shadow had burnt through his, you still came up with some angles to pursue that some people might want to see, even if you personally think they'd feel forced. And for Marine, I feel even her single-game appearance can have sufficiently (though not exhaustively) fulfilled her potential. She had a solid little arc where she clearly learned and improved herself...and I don't think it's any more necessary to see what comes next for her than for Shadow after ShtH. And I say that as someone who's gone very sour on Shadow, and as one of the few people who liked Marine.

If someone wants it hard enough, they can always find something in a character to write around, some "potential". Leaving it at that is, like I said, basically just saying "I don't want to let go of this". It doesn't convince me that their potential is any good. It doesn't convince me that their potential is worth pursuing over some other story's potential, whether it's about existing characters or brand new ones. If people would more often articulate what they think we could get out of keeping a character around I might be more inclined to take the argument seriously, but too often it begins and ends with just unspecified "potential".

  • Thumbs Up 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im sorry and forgive me but I have to disagree. And to be honest theres something about the "it fustrates me when people say about poetental because it means they want to hold on to something that ****I**** think is a lost cost" is cringy. And Im the same person who thinks we should put characters on the burner for a while.

Im very sorry but its that I dont understand it. I mean I kinda do, Can someone please put it to simple terms please? I mean I understand able characters who might not have no real use but depend the game they could have a use. Its up to ST to decide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like I said, the whole "potential" thing is a pointless deflection. This argument literally doesn't matter.

The characters who deserve to be in the games are the ones who can be written into the games. No more, no less. Trying to justify to people who don't and never actually will like certain characters that they do contain some undefined, ambiguous, arbitrary amount of "depth" that deserves to be honored for the sake of depth, all just to get them to romp around in a silly-ass 6-hour platformer is actually a really laughable thing, particularly since the main cast is static as shit and has been used terribly, and I don't see many people saying any of them need to go or "prove themselves."

Basically, I don't actually have to justify to anyone why I want to see Shadow in the games beyond "I like him and he's interesting." Neither does anyone else for any other character. So long as that character can have a role in a story, they've met all the criteria they need to have appearances in the future.

  • Thumbs Up 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is why we dont need anymore new characters. 

Need and necessity is irrelevant. Games are art and entertainment. You can do whatever you want with art and entertainment. If Sega wants to make a freakin', I don't know, boss-ass lion character with a supersonic roar, by all rights they can, and if they want to, they should be able to.

  • Thumbs Up 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Need and necessity is irrelevant. Games are art and entertainment. You can do whatever you want with art and entertainment. If Sega wants to make a freakin', I don't know, boss-ass lion character with a supersonic roar, by all rights they can, and if they want to, they should be able to.

I guess so but how can they do that when they dont even know how the use the characters we have anymore?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess so but how can they do that when they dont even know how the use the characters we have anymore?

They would actually have to be allowed to put them back in the games first without everyone flipping their shit about Sonic not having 99.9% of the spotlight. You can't learn to run if you're prohibited through shame and ridicule from even trying to learn how to walk.

  • Thumbs Up 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like I said, the whole "potential" thing is a pointless deflection. This argument literally doesn't matter.

The characters who deserve to be in the games are the ones who can be written into the games. No more, no less. Trying to justify to people who don't and never actually will like certain characters that they do contain some undefined, ambiguous, arbitrary amount of "depth" that deserves to be honored for the sake of depth, all just to get them to romp around in a silly-ass 6-hour platformer is actually a really laughable thing, particularly since the main cast is static as shit and has been used terribly, and I don't see many people saying any of them need to go or "prove themselves."

Basically, I don't actually have to justify to anyone why I want to see Shadow in the games beyond "I like him and he's interesting." Neither does anyone else for any other character. So long as that character can have a role in a story, they've met all the criteria they need to have appearances in the future.

Oh my god, so much YES! It's still a game, no need for everything to be so serious. I don't Sonic has grown as a character in years, but he's still around.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They would actually have to be allowed to put them back in the games first without everyone flipping their shit about Sonic not having 99.9% of the spotlight. You can't learn to run if you're prohibited through shame and ridicule from even trying to learn how to walk.

also knowing there place in the series is also a plus to. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They would actually have to be allowed to put them back in the games first without everyone flipping their shit about Sonic not having 99.9% of the spotlight. You can't learn to run if you're prohibited through shame and ridicule from even trying to learn how to walk.

I don't even think this is really a problem anymore. Sure people make jabs at Sonic's extended cast all the time but I don't think anyone would actually care that much if they were put into games at this point.  Nobody cared when the Deadly Six were introduced and they were actually pretty bad. It's not a case of them not being allowed to do something anymore. They're just...being Sega. 

 

  • Thumbs Up 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

You must read and accept our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy to continue using this website. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.