Was Sonic Ever Good? - A discussion of the popular narrative

[Nepenthe]

Hogfather asked a very simple request for you to name another video game franchise that has lasted as long as or longer than Sonic has while simultaneously having a significant demographic of the game community and game journalism outlets turn against it later in its lifespan and ask whether or not it was ever good in the first place.

You proceeded into a long irrelevant diatribe about mere difference in opinion and further broadened your answer into meaningless by comparing this simple question about a very specific franchise all the way to the fucking birth of religion on nothing more than broad and badly applied philosophical grounds, in turn derailing the thread in the process and never actually answering his question.

If you can't answer the question, then you can't answer it. There's no reason to stretch the discussion so damn thin to the point that it's beginning to get derailed.

[Nightly]

On the topic of "Sonic was never good", I think that there are several reasons as to why this has been the the popular narrative as of late.

One of the reasons is that Sonic's "cool". Now, I don't think that being cool is a bad personality trait for a character, it can really make them stand out and gives them some personality. Now Sonic generally did this pretty well in the classic games (admittedly mostly cause he didn't talk), but as the series went forward and gave him a voice and dialogue written for him, they did it in the worst way possible. From Sonic Adventure onward, Sonic was "cool", and by that I mean that was his personality. He wasn't cool because he was a bit mischievous and foiled Dr. Eggman's plans anymore, he was "cool" because he was "cool", which is a surefire way to make a shallow and annoying character.

Also his voice doesn't help. Now I don't personally have a problem with Drummond, or Griffith (aside from the lack of voice direction either of them were given most of the time), but the way they voice Sonic just sounds like a "WHOA 90'S!" teenager, and I mean while it does fit "cool" Sonic, it's also easily grating for a lot of people. Most people don't want to hear some punk-ass teen trying to be all cool and spouting one-liners, it can very easily get annoying. I mean the "Sonic voice" exists for a reason: 

(Just as a side note, Roger Craig Smith is probably the best voice actor we've had for the games so far in terms of his acting capabilities, but at the same time he just makes sonic sound like a 30 year old trying to be all "90's cool teenager")

Another reason why Sonic is seen to have always sucked, is because most of the popular people perpetuating it didn't grow up with the games, or they never liked Sonic in the first place. Now I'm not saying that they're wrong for not liking Sonic, video games like any art form is subjective and impossible to state as "good" or "bad" objectively, as objectivity in that case is pretty much meaningless. However, most of them DO view it as an objective fact, and people like Egoraptor, IGN and the like, can't see past their own biases. Now the reason they have those biases is because they didn't grow up with Sonic in the 90's as fans of it, or at least not huge fans. They looked at other platformers they grew up with like Mario and such, and based their understanding of game design on games like that. Mario games and classic Sonic games have very different mentalities behind their design. Mario is about seeing your obstacles coming up ahead, overcoming them by thinking of a way around it, and then being rewarded by being able to continue through the level. Sonic is about trial and error, running through the level, replaying them, memorizing the level layout, and then being rewarded with speed and flow going through them. Neither design principle is good or bad, it's all up to preference, but most popular people in the gaming space see it as an objective fact. So that's what creates the mindset of "If Mario is good, and Sonic doesn't play like Mario, then therefore Sonic is bad". Then the general gaming populous sees those opinions, and like most people that don't want to spend the time and money to really look into or form individual opinions on things that aren't really important to them, they just go with it. It also doesn't help that there's a ton of crap Sonic games, so if anyone tries to argue that there are good and great Sonic games, all they have to do is point at Sonic 06 or Say that Sonic isn't like Mario and therefore bad.

The last reason I can think of as to why this narrative exists is because of people that grew up with Sonic and are ashamed of it. This is a combination of there being a ton of crappy games and people not wanting to admit that they like something that they don't see of a good enough quality, them being ashamed of liking Sonic cause of his "cool" attitude, and all that weird fetish art and OC stuff online. Most people look back on what they were like as kids and teenagers in shame, and Sonic fits in perfectly with that. He's a blue talking cartoon hedgehog that spouts lines like "AW YEAH, THIS IS HAPPENIN", and a ton of the stuff you see people make of sonic online is very, and I hate using this word but, "cringe worthy". Top that off with all the weird fetish stuff and OCs and it's no wonder why lots of people think that the only people who like sonic are insane. And it's not like all the weird fan stuff is limited to Sonic, literally everything ever has fanworks like that, but Sonic has it brought to the forefront because 1, he's seen as obnoxious and obnoxious people/things bring attention to themselves, and 2, because of the long drought of crap and mediocre games makes headlines, and therefore people are going to notice Sonic, and therefore notice all the weird cringe shit. So because of all of this, the people who are ashamed of liking Sonic as a kid go along with the narrative because they don't want to be seen as a freak that doesn't know quality.

[Hedgehugs]

Honestly been thinking about this, I'mma be kinda vague on the whole topic; "good" is an opinionated word. We all have different things we find "Good" and "Bad". There's no real fact if Sonic was/is good. Depends on the person's tastes of what's "good". You could debate about it for hours but as long as there's two different opinions, there's no fact. 

[Sonic The Badass]

Was Sonic ever good is a matter of personal taste, it's very subjective. But just looking at facts, like others have said you don't become a world wide success to the point that you're more recognizable than Mickey Mouse by being bad unless you're a meme. Even then I doubt there's a meme more recognizable than one of the world's most Iconic characters. Sonic is engraved in gaming history whether you like it or not. That's not something that happens by being just OK. Hell even great games aren't as deeply carved into gaming history as Sonic. A lot of great games are forgotten by the next generation or two. Which means for Sonic to survive 25 years even after producing what is considered to be one of the most disappointing /bad AAA titles to ever exist, you know damn well Sonic has some merit, something special about him that keeps the franchise going. Whether you like him or not. His fans being idiots stuck in the past is not a reason for his survival. It's a cop out for you to say Sonic is trash. No way in hell do you have millions of people stuck to the past wasting $60 for every Sonic game that comes out if they know its going to be trash and their chasing a ghost. 

[Hyp3hat]

Lots of franchises have lasted as long as Sonic whilst still pumping out games  - Mario, Zelda, Metal Gear, anything that's actually lasted for 20 years in the business without being dumped or left behind, like a Castlevania or a Mega Man - but those franchises have never had a debacle like Sonic 06, or even a Shadow The Hedgehog. Sonic in the 2000's was kind of weirdly managed, and suffered hugely from SEGA's cluelessness. 

Of course, this could not happen in a worst time. The internet is a fucking nightmare for a PR person, in a way - when people who regularly command millions of views a day on Youtube say Sonic sucks, a lot of people who did not play Sonic 2 as a kid will accept that as gospel, because people are weirdly devoted to youtubers.

I mean, yeah it sucks, because Sonic 2 is a literal masterpiece of design and Sonic has clawed back a unique, fun style from the dumpster fire of the mid 2000's, and I feel that should be recognised. It's good that we recognise it, though, but it's not the big picture - the amount of people who comment on the internet about videogames is a very small percentage of their playerbase, and the last three times I've been in a videogame shop I've seen kids and their parents debating whether to get Sonic Generations or another Sonic game. The weird youtube opinion wormhole is not the full extent of the videogame playing public, so don't let it bother you.

If I was so concerned about what people thought about videogames, I'd have preordered No Mans Sky. The youtube hype machine is irrelevant, son.

[Mad Convoy]

21 minutes ago, Hyp3hat said:

I mean, yeah it sucks, because Sonic 2 is a literal masterpiece of design and Sonic has clawed back a unique, fun style from the dumpster fire of the mid 2000's, and I feel that should be recognised. It's good that we recognise it, though, but it's not the big picture - the amount of people who comment on the internet about videogames is a very small percentage of their playerbase, and the last three times I've been in a videogame shop I've seen kids and their parents debating whether to get Sonic Generations or another Sonic game. The weird youtube opinion wormhole is not the full extent of the videogame playing public, so don't let it bother you.

I think this interesting to bring up. Outside of the internet, people are pretty much fine with Sonic. Most people have at least some idea of what Sonic is, and opinions tend to range from somewhat positive to completely apathetic. I've never been ridiculed for expressing positive opinions about Sonic in the real world either (even got a compliment once on a Sonic T-shirt I own). But the internet is a completely different story-- at varying points, I've been called autistic, moronic, accused of just liking everything handed to me, mocked, condescendingly informed of things I've already expressed awareness of, etc. and it only got more frequent when I started expressing positive opinions about Boom.

I blame the power of anonymity. Makes people act like a douchebag because it has no personal consequences for them, what other people think be damned. Though what permeates outside the internet is a discussion in itself. I don't think the false narrative of Sonic having always been bad has quite made its way to the real world's cultural perspective.

[Shadowlax]

4 hours ago, Nepenthe said:

Hogfather asked a very simple request for you to name another video game franchise that has lasted as long as or longer than Sonic has while simultaneously having a significant demographic of the game community and game journalism outlets turn against it later in its lifespan and ask whether or not it was ever good in the first place.

 

 

For one thing actually he asked this

10 hours ago, Mayor D said:

When you stop acting so condescending you might want to actually address my response instead of a long post which fails to even name a single franchise which has lasted anywhere near as good as Sonic where there is actual discussion as to if it was ever good.

And do I even need to ask you for examples as to when people where seriously asking if Sonic was ever good which date back to over 10 years ago as you claim?

All that extra stuff you added wasn't apart of the question, nice try though. To which i answered.... basically everything gets that questioned asked about it.

I even provided examples for the second thing he actually asked, with jeff getsman and patrick klepic.

Quote

You proceeded into a long irrelevant diatribe about mere difference in opinion and further broadened your answer into meaningless by comparing this simple question about a very specific franchise all the way to the fucking birth of religion on nothing more than broad and badly applied philosophical grounds, in turn derailing the thread in the process and never actually answering his question.

I said sonic wasn't specifically in that regard, and being in question of ones merit is nothing special whats so ever.Even big things like religion get questioned, that's all I said. You are added a lot of stuff, I can quote myself if you want, apparently you didn't read his post either.

Quote

If you can't answer the question, then you can't answer it. There's no reason to stretch the discussion so damn thin to the point that it's beginning to get derailed.

I did, I can quote myself. Its on the other page.

[Sonic The Badass]

Can you just quote yourself instead of just claiming you can so we can see what part of your statements you justify as an answer? Because simply saying you have the answer is once again leading to the same issue, you're going nowhere. 

[Badnik Mechanic]

44 minutes ago, Shadowlax said:

I even provided examples for the second thing he actually asked, with jeff getsman and patrick klepic.

You plucked a handful of games out of thin air with nothing to back it up. One of those isn't even released anymore as it's original genre and now only gets released as a spinoff title to target horny single people.

You certainly provided nothing to show the conversation about Sonic never being good has been active for a decade.

I originally asked that over 11 hours ago, So I don't particularly hold high hopes that any form of an answer will be posted at this rate.

[Sean]

Shadowlax, we've told you repeatedly to drop the shit and stop derailing the thread. Since you continue to talk back to us you can have a strike.

This entire line of discussion is going to drop right now. And that applies to everyone.

[ChikaBoing]

The Game Scoop is what this topic is about (I think??). Either way, I just wanted to say that not everything they say is without merit. They do say that stuff like Green Hill Zone and so on is fun but the latter half of the original Sonic games can be tedious. Honestly, can't people understand that is an legimitate point to make? 

[Rexeljet]

My apologies for necroing, but this is a topic that interests me for whatever reason.

On 27/08/2016 at 11:09 PM, Nightly said:

Another reason why Sonic is seen to have always sucked, is because most of the popular people perpetuating it didn't grow up with the games, or they never liked Sonic in the first place. Now I'm not saying that they're wrong for not liking Sonic, video games like any art form is subjective and impossible to state as "good" or "bad" objectively, as objectivity in that case is pretty much meaningless. However, most of them DO view it as an objective fact, and people like Egoraptor, IGN and the like, can't see past their own biases. Now the reason they have those biases is because they didn't grow up with Sonic in the 90's as fans of it, or at least not huge fans. They looked at other platformers they grew up with like Mario and such, and based their understanding of game design on games like that. Mario games and classic Sonic games have very different mentalities behind their design. Mario is about seeing your obstacles coming up ahead, overcoming them by thinking of a way around it, and then being rewarded by being able to continue through the level. Sonic is about trial and error, running through the level, replaying them, memorizing the level layout, and then being rewarded with speed and flow going through them. Neither design principle is good or bad, it's all up to preference, but most popular people in the gaming space see it as an objective fact. So that's what creates the mindset of "If Mario is good, and Sonic doesn't play like Mario, then therefore Sonic is bad". Then the general gaming populous sees those opinions, and like most people that don't want to spend the time and money to really look into or form individual opinions on things that aren't really important to them, they just go with it. It also doesn't help that there's a ton of crap Sonic games, so if anyone tries to argue that there are good and great Sonic games, all they have to do is point at Sonic 06 or Say that Sonic isn't like Mario and therefore bad.

On the topic of this argument, long before the "Sonic was never good" fallacy was in vogue, I remember the one criticism directed towards the classic games (at least by non-fans) was something that roughly translated to "Sonic is so fast that you have no time to react to oncoming obstacles!" and this is still often cited as a reason as to why Sonic was allegedly never good. My guess is that, whilst there have always been people who dislike Sonic, they've historically went under the assumption of "Well, people hold the Sonic series in high regard, so it must just be me". Of course, with Sonic's ever-diminishing reputation, these people now feel more confident about their opinion that Sonic was always crap, to the point where people have started to treat this opinion has hard fact.

Incidentally, since I played Sonic first, I feel that way about Mario to some extent. I often keep running into things and dying in the 2D Mario games because I forget to take it slow and generally have a harder time with "precise" platforming. According to various forum posts and YouTube comments I've seen, I'm not alone. Maybe a bad Mario game will come out one day in the future and people will start saying that the chubby plumber was never good.

The funny thing is, though, that I'd have expected the "Sonic was never good" spiel to take off around the time of 06, yet I never heard it until around 2013-14 (i.e. before Rise of Lyric, but probably after Lost World). Before then the general perception of the Sonic series tended to be "Sonic hasn't been good since the move to 3D" or "Sonic hasn't been good since he left Sega hardware". At most you may have heard someone say that the downward spiral began with Sonic 3.

I think one main reason why people get bugged about the "Sonic was never good" argument and people treating it as gospel, is because of the (admittedly unlikely) risk that it will become "accepted" as part of gaming history. Sure, it almost certainly won't happen, but the generally accepted history of gaming is full of inaccuracies- there's more misinformation surrounding the 1983 Video Game Crash than Sir Walter Raleigh!

 

[NintendoSoul]

Maybe a few of the older main titles aren't as good as some of us think they are, but that doesn't mean every "good" Sonic 2D game is actually terrible and we only deluded ourselves into seeing quality games. I personality think anyone who believes Sonic never had any good games is really trying to say they just didn't enjoy them, but they don't know know to express this as a self -reflected opinion on their experiences.