Detective SSMB & The Case of the Sonic 25th Anniversary "P.g. 100 is the best... food discussion started."

[Salamander]

Developers sometimes get a bit of an inferiority complex about 2D gameplay, as they do with 2D graphics, and get it into their heads that no self-respecting game company these days makes 2D games; that the moment they get the ability to, they have to upgrade to 3D, for the sake of their reputation and self-respect.  I feel like Sonic Team might still be stuck in that rut, caught between a reluctance to "go backwards" and the knowledge that their 2D games are the best and best-liked they've ever made.  So they keep on plugging away at 3D, making token gestures towards 2D now and then which their heart clearly isn't in and outsourcing handheld and mobile games in actual 2D, and then when they realise that they can do it then suddenly their handheld games have to play in 3D as well, even though they have no idea what the 3D gameplay of the series actually as...  Pure speculation, of course.  But it'll be interesting to see their next non-Boom handheld title.

[Riverstone]

This is pretty halarious (specifically the date of the event and the name)

And don't jump to any conclusions, as it's a real thing and part 2 was a real event last year.

http://heyevent.uk/e

Still...pretty darn funny

[Milo]

6 hours ago, Shadowlax said:

I want them to do both. 

Like that time they were doing that. You know when the released both 2d hand held games and 3d console games. Almost as if its thats possible, like sega and a lot of the fanbase forgot you could do that. 

It's precisely because they were on handheld systems that the fans and Sega don't even know that they exist. The handheld Sonic games have historically gotten nowhere near the amount of attention and promotion as the console Sonic games, especially so since all of them are outsourced and have not been made in-house by Sonic Team themselves. I'll even wager that is also one of the reasons why the handheld games have been dumbed down variants of the console games starting with Colors. Instead of having to produce and market two versions of Sonic games --one for handhelds and one for consoles--, just produce and market one Sonic game for both gaming platforms (which in this context means just have the handheld games be an adaptation of the console games).

A good 2D Sonic game would get a lot more attention from the general public, let alone Sega and the fanbase, if Sega gave the handheld titles the same amount of promotion as the 3D games--which as we've seen, has never been the case until the handheld versions stopped being original titles (and even then, the console games still get the lion's share of promotion). So that option is very unlikely. The remaining option for a good 2D Sonic game to get noticed is to simply develop it for consoles instead.

Indeed, the last time Sonic Team themselves made a fully 2D or 2.5D Sonic game has been Sonic & Knuckles. Save for the Backbone-developed Rivals series and the SNK-developed Pocket Adventure, all other 2D or 2.5D Sonic games made since that title have been made by Dimps instead, and all of those titles were made strictly for handhelds (Sonic 4 the lone exception, and even then it was originally intended as a mobile game first and foremost).

[Indigo Rush]

The 2D vs 3D topic is frustrating because both playstyles have wonderful merits to them: but I often find presuppositions attached to each approach that prevents genuine discussion about said merits. Not exclusively here, mind you. But I digress; it's still a prevalent issue that bothers me.

The main negative assumptions that come with each desire are usually as follows: If it's a 2D game, those in favor are usually told that it would be "backwards" and prevent the "progression" of the series somehow, and that even if it was good, it would somehow hinder the development of a good 3D Sonic game. I offer the counterarguments as follows: a 2D series and a 3D series can co-exist (within the same canon, too) with no detrimental effect to the series as a whole - and there is still room for progression within the sidescrolling classic mechanics as well; the Advance series introduced new ideas while keeping the feel of the original games intact, so I don't see how we've reached the bottom of the barrel with Classic Sonic, or 2D Sonic in general. Improvements can be made. I still wish I could use shield abilities while invincible in Sonic 3, for one. :|

Conversely, and nowhere near as often around here, but you all know this mentality exists, many believe that Sonic either inherently cannot work in a 3D environment; or that if he were going to, it would need to be either too-far removed from the originals, or exactly like the originals, even going so far as to remove the homing attack. The reality is that there are concepts in Sonic (exploration, simple platforming, speed and thrill/spectacle) that may even work better in 3D than 2D, and while 3D Sonic should strive to follow as close to the original mechanics as possible, not everything can translate as well into 3D, and compromises probably have to be made (the homing attack, for one) to make the game accessible and fun. It's not an easy thing to do, either way...

...and then there's also the controversy between the Adventure approach and the Boost approach, as if they could somehow simply compromise and use some of the same mechanics and please everyone. Mixing the "best of both" will not work as intended: the two have different focuses and mechanics, so it's best to keep both of them separate and build upon what makes them great, and then work on making them better.

Finally, the last presupposition I find with all of this is that, somehow, having 2 or 3 token play-styles would somehow split the fanbase. Aside from the fanbase already being fractured, the logic doesn't follow that consolidating Sonic's most successful game styles (Classic, Adventure, Boost) into 3 solid and polished sub-series is any different than what time-tested franchises like Mario and Zelda do - Mario has his 2D retro-revival games, the open-hubworld 3D style, and then the more linear 3D Land/3D World styles - that's 3. Zelda, meanwhile, has top-down 2D, full 3D, and the occasional motion control experiment - also 3. And for a while, Mega Man was rocking it with far too many to count, and still managed to do okay at the time. I don't see why Sonic is somehow excluded from this approach, especially considering how successful the Classics, Adventures and Boost games really were. 

Anyway, that's my take on the previous discussions at hand. Feel free to disagree, but I think the biggest issue in the fanbase as a whole are strongholds such as these that we put up. (I am not touching story and tone with a 10-foot pole right now)

[Hero of Legend]

1 hour ago, Riverstone said:

This is pretty halarious (specifically the date of the event and the name)

And don't jump to any conclusions, as it's a real thing and part 2 was a real event last year.

http://heyevent.uk/e

Still...pretty darn funny

First Half Life, 3 screenshots.

[Milo]

1 hour ago, Indigo Rush said:

Finally, the last presupposition I find with all of this is that, somehow, having 2 or 3 token play-styles would somehow split the fanbase. Aside from the fanbase already being fractured, the logic doesn't follow that consolidating Sonic's most successful game styles (Classic, Adventure, Boost) into 3 solid and polished sub-series is any different than what time-tested franchises like Mario and Zelda do - Mario has his 2D retro-revival games, the open-hubworld 3D style, and then the more linear 3D Land/3D World styles - that's 3. Zelda, meanwhile, has top-down 2D, full 3D, and the occasional motion control experiment - also 3. And for a while, Mega Man was rocking it with far too many to count, and still managed to do okay at the time. I don't see why Sonic is somehow excluded from this approach, especially considering how successful the Classics, Adventures and Boost games really were.

On the bit about Mario, I think it kinda has to be clarified in the context of Mario that there aren't really two types of 3D games. It's more that the mini-sandbox 3D playstyle of the earlier 3D titles over time did a gradual retool to the current Super Mario 3D series of games that are designed to play identical to the 2D titles. This is pretty evident in Galaxy games, which arguably bridge the gap between the two, with Galaxy had a fair amount of levels with a linear progression as well as the mini-sandbox levels; and levels in Galaxy 2 not only having a higher ratio of linear levels, but also (as discussed in this Game Maker's Toolkit video--it's a good watch btw, highly recommend taking a look at it) establishing the "4 Step" level design that the 3D series is built on. I think it's been said by some veteran Mario developers that they might return to the style of the older Mario games in the future, but we'll see how that fares.

Nothing I don't disagree with otherwise. Though I do note that if Sonic does get such a split into two or three styles, each style would arguably need its own team dedicated towards making those games. Nothing about Sonic Team or Dimps in their current states tells me they're interested in the Classic playstyle, so Sega --if they were interested in keeping the Classic playstyle alive-- either have to find or establish a new studio or division (in-house or outsourced) towards making that specific style of Sonic games.

[Rey Skywalker-Ren]

3 minutes ago, Inspector Gabe said:

Nothing about Sonic Team or Dimps in their current states tells me they're interested in the Classic playstyle, so Sega --if they were interested in keeping the Classic playstyle alive-- either have to find or establish a new studio or division (in-house or outsourced) towards making that specific style of Sonic games.

That is true NOW, however Dimps was the one who made the Advance trilogy. These games though very unique have stayed true to the Genesis gameplay thus most think are the true successors to Sonic 3 and Knuckles. So, for me, it's not that they are incapable, they defiantly are.... it's just that they chose not to do it which is frustrating at it's least. Frustrating in a sense that the Genesis gameplay is not even that hard to program into a 2D environment or even implement. 

[Milo]

23 minutes ago, Mikyeong said:

That is true NOW, however Dimps was the one who made the Advance trilogy. These games though very unique have stayed true to the Genesis gameplay thus most think are the true successors to Sonic 3 and Knuckles. So, for me, it's not that they are incapable, they defiantly are.... it's just that they chose not to do it which is frustrating at it's least. Frustrating in a sense that the Genesis gameplay is not even that hard to program into a 2D environment or even implement. 

Eh, I'd say only the first Advance was the only game that stuck to the classics in regards to both gameplay and level design. Advance 2's gameplay was still relatively close (and better than Advance 1 in some areas) but the level design was streamlined for the sake of emphasizing linear speed. Then Advance 3 jumped to the opposite end of the spectrum and had the levels be straight up schizophrenic in their structure, while the gameplay was also being retooled into something noticeably different. Compared to Advance 1 and 2, 3's controls are considerably laggy, and its physics are even floaty at times.

In terms of replicating the classic gameplay (in this context, regarding to both controls, physics, and level design), only Advance 1 and reportedly Pocket Adventure were relatively watertight to the Genesis games, and even then they were only fairly basic reincarnations. Sonic 3 & Knuckles is probably still the furthest the formula of the classic games have been pushed in terms of modes and features.

[Radiant Hero Ike]

14 hours ago, RazorToshiba said:

I see what you did there

 

the reason for Colors having a different lighting engine is because the "Hedgehog engine" was too powerful for the Wii's seriously dated hardware, if they had held off and released it on wii U (But really, who's gonna hold off for years to put a game on a console when it's already done) it would have supported the same shaders as gens/unleashed, the gameplay style however, is basically the same "Boost to win" style just with more platforming elements thrown in. 

I wasn't being serious. XP The game is terrible (to me, mind you) for other reasons.

Honestly even if it were on HD consoles, I still doubt I'd like it.

[Your Vest Friend]

16 hours ago, Jango said:

I'm sure even people who want a 3D game would like a 2D one if it is great above all things, art style included.

Not really. They're fine for a diversion, but in lieu of a 3D title they just don't hold up for me because I don't find them as fun. The only ones I'd really say were above that were Sonic 2, Chaotix and Rush Adventure. 

...Well, this is awkward. 

[Enesephus]

4 minutes ago, Detective Reptiles said:

Not really. They're fine for a diversion, but in lieu of a 3D title they just don't hold up for me because I don't find them as fun. The only ones I'd really say were above that were Sonic 2, Chaotix and Rush Adventure. 

...Well, this is awkward. 

How is that, exactly?

Anyway, just because you see 2D Sonic games as a mere diversion doesn't mean tons of other 3D fans (myself included) wouldn't love a fantastic 2D Sonic experience on consoles. Sonic 3 and Knuckles, while no longer my favorite Sonic game, is probably my most played because it is a great game that holds up really well (though I can see you don't have it listed as one of the 2D games you like, so feel free to disagree with me there). If SEGA could make a modern 2D Sonic game for consoles as great as Sonic 3 and Knux or Rayman Origins, you can bet I'd love it as much as any 3D game, and I'm sure many others would, too.

[Blacklightning]

11 hours ago, Indigo Rush said:

Finally, the last presupposition I find with all of this is that, somehow, having 2 or 3 token play-styles would somehow split the fanbase. Aside from the fanbase already being fractured, the logic doesn't follow that consolidating Sonic's most successful game styles (Classic, Adventure, Boost) into 3 solid and polished sub-series is any different than what time-tested franchises like Mario and Zelda do - Mario has his 2D retro-revival games, the open-hubworld 3D style, and then the more linear 3D Land/3D World styles - that's 3. Zelda, meanwhile, has top-down 2D, full 3D, and the occasional motion control experiment - also 3. And for a while, Mega Man was rocking it with far too many to count, and still managed to do okay at the time. I don't see why Sonic is somehow excluded from this approach, especially considering how successful the Classics, Adventures and Boost games really were.

There's a few things I take issue with here. First of all, I don't personally consider the fact that the fandom's divided any reason not to try and glue the whole thing back together. Yes, many of them will be anal about it, that's a fact we've all come to live with - but I still believe there are very reasonable compromises to be made between all the splits Sega have created inadvertently or otherwise, to hell with what the elitists think. Secondly, most other franchises can afford to do this because they have a very strong set of core principles to draw from - the physics of most Mario games are damned near identical, Zelda at worst only differs in how intricate swordplay is, and Megaman, well... bar an outlier or two, the vast majority of them were completely interchangable. Most of the splits in Sonic's identity are only similar on an extermely superficial level, to the point that some apologists have to stoop as low as "he has a rolling animation at all" to draw comparisons. That's like ordering a meat pizza and expecting not to be disappointed when the actual meat is camel and rat - it's not technically wrong, but at the same time it's not really what anyone asked for. Goddamnit you guys I can't believe you made me make a food analogy

It's funny that you should mention polish though, because that in of itself is a huge flaw in Sega's current approach. Much as I'd rather the Sonic games pool their resources into a single front, I still have to admit any one of them can technically be great on their own merit - we've seen this happen in two out of the three you mentioned, with the Boost games growing into an objectively good Generations by steadily identifying and ironing out the flaws of Unleashed with time and familiarity, and the Classics devising brand new tropes and tiny little fixes with huge benefits each successive game (unless you count Sonic 4, lol). But so far this has only happened in the relatively short term, because Sega has a bad habit of completely abandoning everything at the drop of a hat even when it makes literally zero sense to do so. There hasn't been an Adventure styled game for nearly a decade to this day, a Boost game for five years, and Sega's current understanding of the classics seems almost as superficial as the apologists paint it ("he can jump, roll and spindash! That's enough, right?"). Their obsession with reinvention comes at the cost of failing to recognize or acknowledge anything good they ever become known for, so if there's even a single thing I feel everyone should agree on, it's that something in this bloody series should become consistent enough for Sega to actually start learning from it again and for consumers to start identifying with that interpretation of it.

[Neo_Fire_Sonic]

i don't want 2d or 3d

 

i just want a good sonic game

[Lord-Dreamerz]

4 minutes ago, Neo_Fire_Sonic said:

i don't want 2d or 3d

You want 1D!?

... I couldn't resist. xP

And yeah, I'm also fine with 2D or 3D gameplay as long the game is well made.

[Drunk Michael Myers]

8 minutes ago, Neo_Fire_Sonic said:

i don't want 2d or 3d

 

i just want a good sonic game

This should do it then

Such an underrated game!

[McGroose]

44 minutes ago, Michael Myers said:

This should do it then

Such an underrated game!

Lol, I think the Saturn version of the game is actually quite good, especially the special stages. Beautiful music and graphics and the gameplay isn't that hard to get used to.

Anyway, I'd prefer having a fully 3D game, but if Sega can prove themselves I'd be fine with a fully 2D game. I don't want half & half though. I want the game to be either fully 3D or 2D. I'm sick of Sega trying to put the two together. We haven't had a solid 3D Sonic experience in....Oh, I don't know, Sonic Unleashed. Not dissing on Unleashed, but enough of this trend already. The boost gameplay and platforming can work side by side, reducing the amount of work that needs to be done on maps to make them longer and adding more incentive to make the game fully 3D.

[Neo_Fire_Sonic]

1 hour ago, Michael Myers said:

This should do it then

Such an underrated game!

the pc version was better >.>

[Indigo Rush]

No, it wasn't. The Saturn version is the superior version when comparing the two:

PC Special Stage

Saturn Special Stage

 

PC Final Boss

Saturn Final Boss

 

Spoiler

Both are visually better than the Genesis version, at least.

 

[Rey Skywalker-Ren]

I really want to see a good 2D Sonic game that doesn't use Rush mechanics and stays true to the spirit of the classic games. We have had alot of 3D games which is fine but ever since the Advance series I haven't played a really good 2D game that captured that spirit. I mean I find Sonic Rush to be mediocre at it's best, Sonic Rush Adventure is better yes and I enjoy it more but even then... I'm tired of them promising the game of the life time when it's not that hard to do.

Just, no more Sonic 4 marketing, no more Sonic Rush material in 2D games (no boosting, no wonky physics and please no homing attack).... just give me a good 2D Sonic game that captures the spirit of the Genesis era and remind me why I love playing Sonic so much. 

[Chris Knopps]

In regards to the 2D vs 3D topic I'm in the ship saying split the two styles altogether and start making a 3D series and 2D series that exist simultaneously as was done during the Adventure and Advance/Rush timelines.

I didn't see anything wrong with that and I still don't, especially since... Oh... I dunno... Handheld games were UNIQUE back then as well and we got DOUBLE the new Sonic titles as a result..?

I don't know why anyone would be against that, but to each their own.

[azoo]

Nah. I want 3D and 2D games, sure, but a 'style split' isn't necessary.

Granted that may be what you're getting at, since the Adventure games (at least for Sonic) and the Advance games play very similarly and coexisted as part of the same exact series, but for the sake of making another point altogether that needs to be addressed: I'd rather us not have a huge style divide amongst the games.

For example, taking modern Sonic and classic Sonic's gameplays from Generations and making them two coexisting 'series' (which is something loads of people suggest as a reasonable answer) is a decent idea, but it doesn't really fix any issues with series consistency as much as push the problem somewhere else. Plus, it'd only cause people to side with which one they prefer, thanks to how having two different 'series' of sorts is just going to have them file certain completely different design decisions into one style or the other instead of trying to find a proper core that brings it all together.

So while it'd definitely bring better games, it'd retain that same old divide the series and it's fanbase has always had to put up with. Which I think is something the series should be working towards mending together instead of building walls around.

[Hyp3hat]

Yeah, 2D or 3D would be fine with me - but they'd have to commit to it fully. I'm sure I'm not alone in wanting a Sonic game that's just One Thing. I really love the boost games, but the problem with them as Games is that it's half Boost and half something else - Be it Werehog, or Classic Sonic (which is what half of Colours' stages were, really). 

Now, maybe the Sonic Team that does the Boost games really have spent the 5 years since Generations working on a 100% boost game that takes advantage of PS4/Xbone tech to be insanely fast, but SEGA are broke as hell, so I really doubt it. 

Then again, a full 2D game (that actually plays and looks good, unlike Sonic 4 Ep 1) would be something special. But not with half of another game stapled to it. 

[WakanoBaka]

I'd agree with Chris and Azoo.

We could have 2D and 3D separated like what happen with 3D on console, 2D on handheld.

But no one said we wouldn't have Generations style 3D then 2D.

They both sound like great ideas that can co-exist.

Problem is like Hyp said......SEGA is broke....like every gaming company from the 90s that isn't Nintendo.

[Hyp3hat]

9 minutes ago, WakanoBaka said:

We could have 2D and 3D separated like what happen with 3D on console, 2D on handheld.

This personally would annoy the hell out of me - realistically, I can only afford one new games console and it's going to be a PS4 because I was drunk and preordered Shenmue 3  I'm generally broke, I walk to work, and don't enjoy the act of playing handheld games - they don't look or sound particularly great, even with the 3DS and such, and it's uncomfortable for me looking at such a tiny screen. I've barely touched the Advance and Rush games through emulators (and a romcart for the DS), but I prefer to sit back and play a game on my telly. 

Put it this way - If i was a huge Zelda fan, I'd be so mad at Nintendo for remastering OoT and Majora's Mask for the 3DS alone. I'd never play them.

[Milo]

2 hours ago, Azoo said:

Nah. I want 3D and 2D games, sure, but a 'style split' isn't necessary.

Granted that may be what you're getting at, since the Adventure games (at least for Sonic) and the Advance games play very similarly and coexisted as part of the same exact series, but for the sake of making another point altogether that needs to be addressed: I'd rather us not have a huge style divide amongst the games.

For example, taking modern Sonic and classic Sonic's gameplays from Generations and making them two coexisting 'series' (which is something loads of people suggest as a reasonable answer) is a decent idea, but it doesn't really fix any issues with series consistency as much as push the problem somewhere else. Plus, it'd only cause people to side with which one they prefer, thanks to how having two different 'series' of sorts is just going to have them file certain completely different design decisions into one style or the other instead of trying to find a proper core that brings it all together.

So while it'd definitely bring better games, it'd retain that same old divide the series and it's fanbase has always had to put up with. Which I think is something the series should be working towards mending together instead of building walls around.

The thing about doing this though is that it then starts off questions / debates of what elements of each popular style or era from the series (if not each style or era outright) should get "priority" over the others; and ultimately either stay as they are, be retooled, or get dropped completely. I say this because I feel there's a lot of aspects from the major existing identities of Sonic (gameplay, game structure, artstyle, narrative, etc. etc.) that clash with each other more than they do cover the same groundwork. Like Indigo pointed out earlier, the Adventure playstyle and the Boost playstyle are considerably different to each other in both their game mechanics and their focus in their game design, so trying to compromise a playstyle out of the two is a very tall order to say the very least, if not outright unfeasible.

Whichever option you choose, you're gonna likely lose some fans while also bringing other fans together--and for the compulsory and impeding rebuttals of these lost fans being vocal minorities/extremist fans or groups who enjoy the more obscure aspects of the Sonic franchise, no, I'm not referring to (just) those, I'm referring more to general fans who happen to prefer one specific style and aren't really a fan of the possible outcome of their preferred style getting compromised in order for the other styles to (somehow) fit into or sit alongside it (which again, I think is easier said than done due to what I perceive to be a large lack of overlap with the existing styles on a variety of points). You'd greatly succeed with those who are fans of more than one existing style of Sonic, but it would be a harder sell to everyone else who doesn't fit in that category.

That's not to say it isn't possible, but with a fanbase as diverse as Sonic, it's something you have to be extremely cautious with in regards to how you handle it. Especially when factoring in the portions of the fanbase that have their own divisions within them. Otherwise in trying to make a product many can enjoy, you may end up producing a product that pleases few if any people.