Sonic Forces | PS4, Xbox One, Switch, PC "The Next Generations"

[Shadowlax]

1 hour ago, Blacklightning said:

I don't do "adventure" or "boost" or whatever the fad of the week is - all I want is for Sonic games to remember why they're Sonic games, and to be fun games to play because of it. Nothing more.

 

Why they are sonic games are different things to different people.

What is fun for some isnt fun for others. And what makes sonic games for some isnt the same for others.

There isnt a universal concept.

So your speach isn't really realistic in anyway. Even mario has entirely different design philosopies for 2 and 3d mario. In theme and in gameplay.

So I ask in enerst, what in even asking for? Because it seems like you dont even know. You can label adventure a fad of a week its a gameplay philosphy, and that's whether you like it or not is liked by people and is more complicated than just a fad the week. To some that is sonic so in what world is your view of sonic  inherently more "sonic" than theirs it doesn't. Your post comes off as naive at best and kind of selfish and condecending at worst.

To try and incorperate other elements into a game id fine but just mashing them together makes no sense. While yes for many the end goal of game design is make fun game, how to point B is complicated. And why is your point be route better than billy's point be route.

So again, what is it do you want, and why is that inherently more right than someone eleses desire as you seem to be asserting

[Blacklightning]

5 minutes ago, Shadowlax said:

Why they are sonic games are different things to different people.

What is fun for some isnt fun for others. And what makes sonic games for some isnt the same for others.

There isnt a universal concept.

So your speach isn't really realistic in anyway. Even mario has entirely different design philosopies for 2 and 3d mario. In theme and in gameplay.

You say this, yet Mario games aren't really different to such an extent that they're completely different games. Nearly all of the physics and most of the same moves are shared between the main Mario games - you'll already have some idea of how 3D Mario works if you've only played 2D prior, and vice versa. This is where the comparison starts to fall apart. Despite their differences, what of them exist, they all draw from a common pool of mechanics and themes. You can't really say that for Sonic - they don't build off of one another, they've essentially formed competing offshoots of the franchise entirely, and it's really not healthy for growth, not the least of which because again, it causes fans to argue over which one is better rather than to swallow their pride and stop taking sides like a preteen fanboy.

And with that said, I really need to emphasise that this problem is self fulfilling - these splits in the fandom exist because Sega fucking put them there. Not intentionally, of course, they're not that stupid. But by using Sonic as a vehicle for gimmicks rather than building off of what already worked, they're inadvertently lending importance to each and every one of them without any consistency to note. It's not asking a lot to know what to expect of Sonic, let alone for the developers to understand it so they know what needs fixing and what doesn't.

17 minutes ago, Shadowlax said:

To try and incorperate other elements into a game id fine but just mashing them together makes no sense.

That's a pretty good reason why I said "resonable compromise" and not "just mix the source codes together and hit compile, what could go wrong?". I advocated no such lunacy here.

[Shadowlax]

49 minutes ago, Blacklightning said:

You say this, yet Mario games aren't really different to such an extent that they're completely different games.

 

Yes they are, 3d games and 2d games are quite different in exicution to the degree in which several video game franchises during the ps1/n64 and the ps2/gc/xbox era died trying to achieve it, from design to design, to visuals to how a narrative is presented is much different than a two games. Super Mario World, and Super Mario 64 are much different games and required much different design philosophies in terms of game play to become functional in their own rights. Mario 64 had to litterally invent 3d 3rd person movement to function, that is something that litterally does not exist in a 2d game. Something that the GTA's Houser brothers thank that game for by the way. How you teach someone is different, how show gameplay elements are different. These are entirely different things to make function, let alone make good.

Also there are mario games that are entirely different genre's, there's that. Like RPG"s and stuff

Quote

Nearly all of the physics and most of the same moves are shared between the main Mario games

That's literally untrue. That's not even possible. It is impossible for mario galaxy to have the same physics as NSMBU, what are you even talking about. Even the moves that they share function differently in different physics  and environments. Also 2d and 3d mario probably run on entirely different engines.

Quote

- you'll already have some idea of how 3D Mario works if you've only played 2D prior, and vice versa

No, no you don't. Besides you run and jump on a thing 3d marios generally have different rules than 2d marios. LIke air, or gravity systems, or how power ups function, or the entire concept of everything you are doing because 3d now adds depth that 2 mario does not have. And I don't just mean depth as in , like the crazy stuff you can do in 3d mario, high level 3d mario play can get gorgeous though. I mean, literally depth, you can move in 3d

.

Quote

This is where the comparison starts to fall apart. Despite their differences, what of them exist, they all draw from a common pool of mechanics and themes.

Running and jumping in 2d isn't the same as running and jumping from 3d, along with the myriad of just gameplay stuff that exists in 3d mario and how its presented thats can't be done in a 2d games. So no, not not all. Mario runs and jumps, sometimes he grabs a power up, that's consistant, outside of that or even how that works in 3d

Quote

You can't really say that for Sonic - they don't build off of one another, they've essentially formed competing offshoots of the franchise entirely,

I don't know if it would call it competeting considering at one point, were making multiple types of games at once... and then just decided to stio

Quote

and it's really not healthy for growth, not the least of which because again, it causes fans to argue over which one is better rather than to swallow their pride and stop taking sides like a preteen fanboy.

Or people can have opinions about which thing is great , and can appropriate and argue for that thing to be made. You sir sound like the preteen fanboy. Why is people arguing for something they like bad? Because its different from your vision?

Quote

And with that said, I really need to emphasise that this problem is self fulfilling - these splits in the fandom exist because Sega fucking put them there. Not intentionally, of course, they're not that stupid. But by using Sonic as a vehicle for gimmicks rather than building off of what already worked, they're inadvertently lending importance to each and every one of them without any consistency to note. It's not asking a lot to know what to expect of Sonic, let alone for the developers to understand it so they know what needs fixing and what doesn't.

This is true

Quote

That's a pretty good reason why I said "resonable compromise" and not "just mix the source codes together and hit compile, what could go wrong?". I advocated no such lunacy here.

There isn't a reasonable compromise, one because people want different things, and 2 because some games... are just way too different. Like adventure is an entire complicated bag of worms as to what people want.

Good thing Nintendo has litterally been solving that problems for years though

" Some people like 2d zelda and no 3d zelda and vice versa"

" Just make both, and make them good"

 " Oh... we can make more than one type of video game in one franchise regularly with quality? What a novel Idea, "

 

My solution to this problem, is to never solve the problem. Or rather the issue here isn't the problem, the problem is quality, if all the different types of sonic games had all consistent quality , no one would care. Don't rush the games, make em good, make them different, congradulations, you have different revenue streams.

[Blacklightning]

2 minutes ago, Shadowlax said:

Yes they are, 3d games and 2d games are quite different in exicution to the degree in which several video game franchises during the ps1/n64 and the ps2/gc/xbox era died trying to achieve it, from design to design, to visuals to how a narrative is presented is much different than a two games. Super Mario World, and Super Mario 64 are much different games and required much different design philosophies in terms of game play to become functional in their own rights. Mario 64 had to litterally invent 3d 3rd person movement to function, that is something that litterally does not exist in a 2d game. Something that the GTA's Houser brothers thank that game for by the way. How you teach someone is different, how show gameplay elements are different. These are entirely different things to make function, let alone make good.

Semantics. There are some quirks innate to 2D and 3D, yes, that much I didn't deny. But your bounce when you jump on enemies still increases depending on how long you hold your jump button, your momentum still carries over from after the fact, walljumps and triplejumps were adopted in practically every main game after they were adopted (main being the point of emphasis - spinoffs are an entirely different beast and not really the point of discussion), and well, most of the major quirks of the franchise's movement never really changed, and when they did it was across the board. Meanwhile on the Sonic side, you start losing momentum just by jumping now for no reason made obvious by the game or any other games in the franchise prior, and it's only broken apart in more bizarre and nonsensical ways since - and oftentimes not by oversight.

It's also pretty telling that you have to use 2D and 3D games as a case in point for your argument here, when Sonic games can't even remain consistent in the same dimension, let alone two.

9 minutes ago, Shadowlax said:

Or people can have opinions about which thing is great , and can appropriate and argue for that thing to be made. You sir sound like the preteen fanboy. Why is people arguing for something they like bad? Because its different from your vision?

Because sometimes what you personally like isn't in the best interests of the franchise and the fanbase as a whole, and certain compromises have to be made for games to be able to stand up on objective merits? Isn't it kind of hypocritical to call people out for disagreeing with other people's visions (nevermind the fact that my whole argument was for the sake of being inclusive to many demographs by finding their common thread anyway) only to advocate sticking up only for your own beliefs and nobody else's?

See, this is exactly the kind of shit I'm talking about. Treating the styles as mutually exclusive, whilst making zero attempt to find a middle ground. It needs to be said that I wasn't actually referring to you originally when I made that remark, but now that you've shown your colours it frankly needs to be said that this is fanboyism of the most blatant kind, and this isn't going to be a very fun discussion if you continue to see things that way.

19 minutes ago, Shadowlax said:

There isn't a reasonable compromise, one because people want different things, and 2 because some games... are just way too different.

Once again I have to emphasise this, because it doesn't seem as though you're getting it yet: I'm not advocating a complete merge of all the games in the franchise together into an unplayable clusterfuck, just to salvage their better traits into a singular playstyle. Most fans of the classic games will say that their "better traits" are its physics, for example, so it makes perfect sense to take that specific trait and bundle it together with traits of other games that don't conflict with it, say for example a world and/or a hub with the scale of the Adventure games. It's a manner of thinking built in mind for fun first and fanservice second, so frankly if certain people are so ornery that they will accept only a single brand of fun, complete with its flaws and caveats, then frankly they weren't going to be pleased no matter what you did for them. Acceptable losses for net gains.

[Shadowlax]

1 hour ago, Blacklightning said:

Semantics.

Semantics I saying my hair ain't black is dark brown, Semantics is saying my eyes aren't green they are olive,. Saying that the complixity in difference when it comes to designing a 2d game vs a 3d game, and using the multitude of failed 2d to 3d game transitions of that era as an example. Isn't semantics, Its understanding game design even in mario is more than running and jumping

 

1 hour ago, Blacklightning said:

Quote

There are some quirks innate to 2D and 3D, yes, that much I didn't deny

Quirks? The entire movement system and potential for movement is literally different, there are people making discovering about how you can move and what you can do in 3d to this day, its more than quirks. You are literally handwaving something than the entire video game industry was giving universal praise to nintendo for , and the creators of grand theft auto themselves to this day thank nintendo for by creating that analog 3d movement basically allowing their 3d expansion to their franchise to exist.

You can't hand wave that.

 

.

Quote

But your bounce when you jump on enemies still increases depending on how long you hold your jump button, your momentum still carries over from after the fact,

That still works different in 3d, how you bounce, what you bounce in, the physics of the thing, how long you bounce. What is the bounce contributing to in the level, does it contribute to the goal, where is it placed, what is it for. Is it trying to show you or teach you something? If so, what is it trying to show you , what's the most effective way one can design the level to lead your eye to that. This is much more complicated than running and jumping, I can write a paper on how the first portal access level in sunshine exemplifies the use of concepts of positioning that can only exist in 3d.

Quote

walljumps and triplejumps were adopted in practically every main game after they were adopted (main being the point of emphasis - spinoffs are an entirely different beast and not really the point of discussion),

Cool, doesn't mean they function the same. Dante is also in several viewtiful joe games, doesn't mean its functions the same as devil may cry.

Quote

and well, most of the major quirks of the franchise's movement never really changed, and when they did it was across the board.

You run and you jump, I admitted that, what i'm arguing is that entire concept is way more complicated than you are giving it credit for.

Quote

Meanwhile on the Sonic side, you start losing momentum just by jumping now for no reason made obvious by the game or any other games in the franchise prior, and it's only broken apart in more bizarre and nonsensical ways since - and oftentimes not by oversight.

 

ok....?

Quote

It's also pretty telling that you have to use 2D and 3D games as a case in point for your argument here, when Sonic games can't even remain consistent in the same dimension, let alone two.

What are you even talking about? I think you were trying to be condensing or something here, I don't know what this is about.

 

Quote

Because sometimes what you personally like isn't in the best interests of the franchise and the fanbase as a whole,

You are a consumer and Sega isn't your friend, Just as much as Sega doesn't have to give a fuck about what you want, you don't have to give a goddamn about what sega wants.If you want something sega isn't giving you, feel free to talk about it and voice such things, it is your right to do so. Sega may or may not listen that's life.  Also who are you to decide such things

Quote

and certain compromises have to be made for games to be able to stand up on objective merits?

What did this part of the sentence have to do with the previous part of the sentence, I don't know. I kind of don't know what you are trying to say here? Are you trying to say folks have to compromise for an objectively good game? One an objectively good or bad game doesn't exist, does it function? someone will love it or hate it, there are people who love sonic 06. But again even on that point, you are the consumer, the fuck should they care about standing up for merits, they want the game they want. If they don't get it, they can not buy it and complain. That's it, sega has no obligation to listen, they have no obligation to just like it

Quote

Isn't it kind of hypocritical to call people out for disagreeing with other people's visions (nevermind the fact that my whole argument was for the sake of being inclusive to many demographs by finding their common thread anyway) only to advocate sticking up only for your own beliefs and nobody else's?

I don't think I ever did that, all I did was suggest a solution to said problem and call you out for not understanding the complexity of game deisgn. But ok

Quote

See, this is exactly the kind of shit I'm talking about. Treating the styles as mutually exclusive,

I believe they are all valuable to someone, and those peoples opinions matter yes.

 

 

Quote

whilst making zero attempt to find a middle ground.

 

I believe the middle ground is to for sega to make quality video games so when they vary styles people will complain less. I made no claims as to this being the only viable way to handle this whatsoever. But ok
 

Quote

It needs to be said that I wasn't actually referring to you originally when I made that remark, but now that you've shown your colours it frankly needs to be said that this is fanboyism of the most blatant kind, and this isn't going to be a very fun discussion if you continue to see things that way.

 

I don't think I fanboyed for anything... I don't think I actually referenced what I wanted sonic to be, at all. I've yet to do that. I just called out logic, but ok.

Quote

Once again I have to emphasise this, because it doesn't seem as though you're getting it yet: I'm not advocating a complete merge of all the games in the franchise together into an unplayable clusterfuck, just to salvage their better traits into a singular playstyle.

To me, that sounds like the same thing.

Quote

Most fans of the classic games will say that their "better traits" are its physics, for example, so it makes perfect sense to take that specific trait and bundle it together with traits of other games that don't conflict with it, say for example a world and/or a hub with the scale of the Adventure games.

So the issue with the example you just used is that the classic games are 2d, to get the world and scale the 3d games had, requires 3d gameplay. That is a giant contradiction in your example, You can't just throw 2d sonic phsyics into 3d 3d sonic plays how it plays when it plays well for a reason.

Quote

It's a manner of thinking built in mind for fun first and fanservice second,

That's true, but I don't think your suggestions sound fun.. at all.

Quote

so frankly if certain people are so ornery that they will accept only a single brand of fun,complete with its flaws and caveats, then frankly they weren't going to be pleased no matter what you did for them. Acceptable losses for net gains.

That's literally not true, considering nintendo does now and sega used to just strait up make different types of games in the franchise, if they made diferent types of games in the franchise of quality... then the people desiring that game would be happy. Everyone wouldn't be happy all the time, they can't hypothetically develop these games at once, but eventually down the line you would get the game you want,

Also I'm not fond of you being like " If you don't like my compromised vision you can just never get the sonic game you want ever again" thing you got going, that just sounds selfish.

[Blacklightning]

2 minutes ago, Shadowlax said:

Quirks? The entire movement system and potential for movement is literally different, there are people making discovering about how you can move and what you can do in 3d to this day, its more than quirks. You are literally handwaving something than the entire video game industry was giving universal praise to nintendo for , and the creators of grand theft auto themselves to this day thank nintendo for by creating that analog 3d movement basically allowing their 3d expansion to their franchise to exist.

...so? I never argued that they were identical, just that they were similar, and they drew from a number of core mechanics to produce that similarity. Mario can bounce high or low depending on his use of the jump button in nearly every main game - that's a similarity and a core mechanic that they have in common.

What exactly are you trying to argue here? Just because I'm arguing for consistency doesn't mean I want games to literally be clones of each other. For fuck's sake.

5 minutes ago, Shadowlax said:

You are a consumer and Sega isn't your friend, Just as much as Sega doesn't have to give a fuck about what you want, you don't have to give a goddamn about what sega wants.If you want something sega isn't giving you, feel free to talk about it and voice such things, it is your right to do so. Sega may or may not listen that's life. 

This isn't even an argument. This is a massive double standard masquerading as defeatism. You are aware this logic gives you just as little right to complain as me, right? If you're going to try to shut down all rational discussion by saying "Sega don't care lol" then what reason do I have to dignify you with a response anymore?

In fact, time out. Serious question. Why are you taking this so personally? Do you have any investment in this discussion at all, or did you only jump in because I didn't mention "Adventure" in the same sentence as "playable sex"? Because it's starting to sound like this is all in defence of that one specific style - one that I passed zero judgements on, in fact - and if you're going to be a baby about it like this then it's already gotten past the point of me giving a damn anymore.

[Shadowlax]

17 minutes ago, Blacklightning said:

...so? I never argued that they were identical, just that they were similar, and they drew from a number of core mechanics to produce that similarity. Mario can bounce high or low depending on his use of the jump button in nearly every main game - that's a similarity and a core mechanic that they have in common.

What exactly are you trying to argue here? Just because I'm arguing for consistency doesn't mean I want games to literally be clones of each other. For fuck's sake.

The orginal argument , if you forgot and what you responded to , was that simply making compromises and combining elements isn't as easy as you think. Defining what is and what isn't sonic in 3d and 2d is a hard concept and picking and choosing element in a franchise this broad seeems like an unnecessary task, and then using mario as an example of something seemingly much simpler, but also complicated in its execution and use of 3d vs 2d. That was start the argument, I saved you the luxury of scrolling up. 

 

Quote

This isn't even an argument. This is a massive double standard masquerading as defeatism. You are aware this logic gives you just as little right to complain as me, right? If you're going to try to shut down all rational discussion by saying "Sega don't care lol" then what reason do I have to dignify you with a response anymore?

It isn't an argument, its life. You have no obligation to care for the company you buy stuff from and vice versa, often people don't and often companies don't. Actually that logic as it so plainly states in thing you quoted from says that everyone can complain , sega doesn't have to listen. That isn't shutting down discussion, that acknowledging that a video game company has no obligation to listen to your imput, they may if they choose to , be weary of that. You still very much have a right to voice your opinion.  I made no attempt to shut down discussion whatsoever. And infact opened it, the only thing I asked you was, why do you have an issue with people complaining

 

Quote

In fact, time out. Serious question. Why are you taking this so personally? Do you have any investment in this discussion at all, or did you only jump in because I didn't mention "Adventure" in the same sentence as "playable sex"? Because it's starting to sound like this is all in defence of that one specific style - one that I passed zero judgements on, in fact - and if you're going to be a baby about it like this then it's already gotten past the point of me giving a damn anymore.

I'm not taking this personally at all, wait I take the mario thing personally. I actually make games , and wish to make games  more professionally, I like talking about game design so I guess it isn't so much personally as it is seriously. .

My investment in the disccsion begins and ends with the thing in my original statement quoting someone else by the way, " Other's people view of sonic is just as valid as yours" and " Sonic being sonic is very different for different people" that's about it. That's all I claimed to state, and the idea of trying to combine all these things seems, like a futile effort IMO.

Its funny you assume I want adventure, because that's not the type of sonic game.. I want right now. And you assumed this, because I questioned your logic, not based on any statements I have made. Like I said in the last quote I haven't fanboyed anything or made any claims to do so to try and remain nutrual in this argument. You assumed wrong, to fuel whatever narrative you got going towards adventure fans or whatever, calling me a baby for no reason, and now you look silly. Good job, good hustle.

[Blacklightning]

2 minutes ago, Shadowlax said:

The orginal argument , if you forgot and what you responded to , was that simply making compromises and combining elements isn't as easy as you think.

So, in effect:

2 hours ago, Blacklightning said:

Once again I have to emphasise this, because it doesn't seem as though you're getting it yet: I'm not advocating a complete merge of all the games in the franchise together into an unplayable clusterfuck, just to salvage their better traits into a singular playstyle. Most fans of the classic games will say that their "better traits" are its physics, for example, so it makes perfect sense to take that specific trait and bundle it together with traits of other games that don't conflict with it, say for example a world and/or a hub with the scale of the Adventure games.

What you are by consequence arguing, is that it is completely impossible to put slope physics into an Adventure world.

You have fun living under your rock, then. I'm done with this.

[Shadowlax]

Impossible no, undesirable for that sort of game, probably. Physics in a game are important and some people might be fond of the 3d physics in sonic game's they actually enjoyed works. Being able to push through or boost through the loopedy loop rather than having the physics do it for them.Or when going off a ramp have where your landing be a decided spot rather than speed based all the time. They would hypothetically want the power in that scenario.

But if this truly the end for you , good night... morning... I don't know where it is where you are. Have a nice day

[StaticMania]

Just now, Shadowlax said:

Being able to push through or boost through the loopedy loop rather than having the physics do it for them.Or when going off a ramp have where your landing be a decided spot rather than speed based all the time. They would hypothetically want the power in that scenario.

If the physics aren't doing it for the player, the automation is...because the boost isn't doing anything in that situation except make it slightly faster. A ramp will always have set locations, a ramp that launches at a set height and/or distance doesn't give the player power at all...it's just more automation.

[Riverstone]

Sonic team needs to hire Diogenes. Seriously, his opinions are always spot on in my eyes. 

Sega has used fans for their PR team and classic sonic game and its worked wonders. Fixing 3d sonic is all that's left 

[Indigo Rush]

Jeez that exchange was painful to read.

Good to see the usual shenanigans afoot around here once again, it was getting boring. Thank goodness for that trailer reveal.

Sonic should be a puzzle drop game. I mean, there's no point trying to please everyone, right? So let's try pleasing no one! 

Spoiler

It'd be more consistent than Sonic Adventure 1, 2 or 2006.

 

[Guest]

Sonic Eraser 2

[Dizcrybe]

38 minutes ago, Indigo Rush said:

Sonic should be a puzzle drop game. I mean, there's no point trying to please everyone, right? So let's try pleasing no one! 

How soon they forget...

[Guest]

this is better than all the games combined

[Manticore]

I think most of us just want a good game. I'm a Classic fan at heart, but I don't care if it plays nothing like the classics. I like Generations, and that is a fundamentally different game to Sonic 2 and Sonic 3.

I just want a Sonic game that is great.

[Nepenthe]

Jesus Christ, let's keep this topic from being a "25th Anniversary"-style shitshow that we actually have to consider locking until more news drops. Passive aggressive posting and image posts about an argument just shit up the thread. Report things; I don't know how many times I have to say this.

[azoo]

So, uhh, since I can't really stay away from this kind of argument, lmao..

Blacklightning is correct. Even with the different specifics between 2D and 3D Mario, they keep the same basic ideas for the games. Mario, in almost all of his games, can use enemy and object physics (for example, Koopa Troopa shells) in playground-esque fashion (like having them chain into blocks, goombas, other koopas, etc), uses temporary power ups (lost by either damage or timer running out), takes advantage of his acrobatic abilities to reach higher up (or secret) areas, leaves you searching for loads of different types of hidden collectibles and goodies, and has you making extensive use of warp pipes. 

Despite certain games handling it differently than others, people know exactly what to expect from a Mario game; and even now Mario is trying to bring that gap even closer, what with how Mario 3D World manages to bring back the run button and the classic mushroom health system.

In contrast, let's look at Sonic's recurring qualities that all his titles share. You run quickly, you collect/drop rings, there's a loop probably.

??????????

BL's argument is that all of Sonic's shared qualities between his different gameplay styles are superficial at best. Nothing has remained the same since the original games, which is a gosh dang shame to the franchise, whether you like/prefer one style or not.

If Sonic were to keep the traits that made his games what they were, then Sonic would have acceleration based movement that can build up and potentially defy gravity, slopey/convex/concave level design that accommodates for that kind of motion by using downhill surfaces to speed you up and uphill ones to slow you down (such as big downhill areas, tall ramps, walls, horizontal or vertical halfpipes, and yes, loops), rolling being a central move that you use to speed up dramatically if used properly on said level design (thus also helping accessing higher up or secret passageways), and enemies, objects and obstacles that encourage you to git gud at timing your reactions to them (which is either to dodge, jump at, or spin into), and even rewarding you with a sense of flow if you can do all that while retaining your speed. Oh yeah, and the ring health system, but that's the one thing that did stay, so good on them I guess.

These were all like the bare necessities of Sonic's gameplay, and guess what? They were in all the classic games, the GG/MS games, the Advance games, and even the Sonic Adventure titles! Sonic built his entire foundation on this gameplay style for the first entire decade of his games, and even the Adventures stick to these ideals despite a few early 3D era misfires (like twitchy movement, and automation) and some adaptation for the extra dimension jump (the homing attack, one button spindash, more flat areas).

The fact that come Heroes and onward that they decided those elements didn't really matter anymore is a shame, because it led to where we are now; where one person highly prefers the gameplay to this one section of games from the franchise (or even an individual title, like Heroes or 06 or Lost World!) to another, all because every other title after a certain point tried to reinvent the series' mechanics to ludicrous extents, and now everyone has preference for completely different games.

That said, the boost gameplay style made it's mark and now it's as much of what people expect from Sonic as the classic style (and in part, the Adventure style) is. So would I be against a game that tries to hybrid the boost style with the classic/Adventure style (in a way that isn't a clusterflump), or at least have a game that makes use of some moves from those games like the drift or quickstep? Absolutely not, as I have my own love for those games (especially Unleashed). 

But I guess what I was getting at was that yes, Sonic did have a consistent style of gameplay before a certain point, and it shouldn't be considered unrealistic for people to actually want or expect Sega to try to revive and make use of those concepts in another big Sonic game, whenever Mario (and most other franchises, really!) stick to their core and make a new experience simultaneously just fine. If anything, Mania should've reminded people (both the fans and the general public) why those ideas are worth salvaging for the main series, and would be fresh on people's minds for moving forward.

But will they use any of it? Who knows? I sure don't! Which is why the discussion kinda comes to a dead end until we learn more about the game.

[Guest]

In short, we`ll see. If you won`t like it just don`t buy it.

[Dr. Detective]

I'm taking a firm personal stance against making any references to any kind of "resistance" or referring to this game as a "Sonic Resistance" until I get confirmation that it's gonna be the kind of "resistance" I wanna see. As in the group of characters I grew up with fighting against a common foe, whether banded together or not (ironically like what happened in Shadow the Hedgehog) for the sake of doing something to advance the plot, whether they be playable or not. If I get Sonic, Classic Sonic, Boom Sonic, and a bunch of the Robo-Sonic's from the stupid Game Simulator thing I may just have to dig a grave for myself.

[Cyrus]

I can't see anyone other than Sonic being playable or bring myself to see "join the resistance" as anything more than a tagline. We all know ST's piss scared to let anyone other than big blue be playable game after that blunder, and probably also the most recent one, so they gotta give every play style they come up with a Sonic mask so the critics and journalists don't go even more uppity about how much a game's gonna suck.

[Wraith]

IMO, they shouldn't be messing around much with alternate styles anyway. That's why Classic Sonic's inclusion has me cautious. 

[Dr. Detective]

I don't know who said anything about alternate play styles. We've got endless proof that those aren't necessary for the cast to be playable, stretching back as far as Sonic 2. Although, I also said "whether playable or not" which implies they don't have to be in order for me to be okay with it.

Just don't have them standing there in the white void doing nothing. 

[Sonic The Badass]

Sonic will probably be the only playable character. But if they did add others it should just play like Sonic except with their own special ability slapped onto the character and level design. (Like Tails in Adventure 1)

[Kuzu]

Yea, I'm leaning heavily towards the Sonics being the only playable characters again, if only because this is obviously piggybacking off the hype surrounding Generations and I see no reason why they'd suddenly shift gears. 

 

That said yea, Classic Sonic have his style of gameplay does kind of dilute the game more than it needs to and pretty much continues the ongoing problem of Sonic games not sticking with one solitary game style.