Jump to content
Awoo.

i don't see why some fans hate classic sonic in forces


GucciBurr

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, GucciBurr said:

so the main complaint is that classic sonic doesn't play as good as in the genesis games

hmm so if he played close enough to them there would be no issue gameplay wise

To be honest, while I would be impressed by their effort if Forces Classic had physics-based platforming gameplay like in Mania, and it would make me FORGIVE the act of including him... the act of including him would still bug me on some level, because it's once again a denial of a proper all-out 3D Sonic game using the gameplay that Unleashed pioneered.

Like, I and many others want a 3D Modern Sonic game, but I only ever get half or less of one every single time.  To suggest Classic Sonic in Forces is fine as long as it's fun would be to suggest that putting 3D Modern Sonic sections in Sonic Mania would be fine as long as they're fun.

  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As other have said, even if he did play well, we wouldn't be received with open hand by everyone.
His inclusion breaks the flow of a coherent setting (unless you acknowledge that he's a different character that now exists int he universe/timeline, that has nothing to do with Sonic -- kinda hard to convince), and also hinders those that seek a 3-D platformer experience.

How would you feel if Modern/Boom Sonic was included in Sonic Mania? He could play well with its remix of the platformer, y'know?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Nepenthe said:

If platformers don't sell well, then adding gimmicks to a platformer is not going to fix the fundamental issue. The issue there is the genre, and we need to face the fact that Sonic took advantage of a genre that has become unpopular in recent years, and thus it should adapt properly without inherently sacrificing its identity and quality control like Mario did.

And the issue is that people want console games that are singular experiences with robust mechanics that can support longer-term experiences, especially considering the asking price of games. If you want to talk about sales, look at the highest selling games and franchises. 99% of them do not extensively carve up the main experience between two or more different styles.

Nepenthe I'm sorry but I have to disagree with you on a point. Unfortunately many games that pander to a casual audience do split up their gameplay in different styles, even if they do so in a much more elegant way than Sonic does.

Uncharted and Tomb Raider are half "platformers" half TPS (there are totally separate sections for these two different playstiles, just like Classic and Modern get different levels). That's actually an issue with "mainstream" releases, they can't focus on a single direction while trying to appeal to a very broad audience.

Mirror's Edge, a platform game about running and parkour had to have rpg elements, stealth and combat, that could've even worked if well integrated, but that game suffers of the same "separate sections" issue too. 

The same can be said for many titles.

Sonic does the same things but it does so while practically associating different playstiles with different characters. Colours already had the OC character levels, just in the form of secondary acts, and people didn't have a problem with that. Now that they're a "separate" playstile, the issue is brought up. Presentation and structure is to be taken in consideration too.

 

Not that I'm saying that it's good design, it's just something not exclusive to the Sonic series. The issue with Sonic is that the audience they're trying to cater to isn't interested in it, or is pissed off by their products. 

With Forces they're trying to pander to Classic fans, Modern fans and casual audience, which is not bad in itself, it's just that they don't get how to do so.

 

I may be wrong on the subject, but I think this is what we're dealing with.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Nepenthe said:

Literally no other franchise splits the focus between its main entrants on new styles and old styles.

Mario doesn't have entire halves of his 3D games dedicated to shoehorning in the original SMB style.

I think it's really interesting that Super Mario Odyssey does have literally SMB-styled segments, but they're just short little cutaways, equal in weight to any number of other smaller gimmicks in the game.  It makes it look like a fun little homage rather than something they really need; you could remove them from the game and the game wouldn't suffer in any significant measure.  If you remove Classic Sonic from Forces and Generations, though, they collapse.  Too much weight is being put on something they can't do well, and that's before you ask whether they should be trying to do it at all.

  • Thumbs Up 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Sonikko said:

Nepenthe I'm sorry but I have to disagree with you on a point. Unfortunately many games that pander to a casual audience do split up their gameplay in different styles, even if they do so in a much more elegant way than Sonic does.

Uncharted and Tomb Raider are half "platformers" half TPS (there are totally separate sections for these two different playstiles, just like Classic and Modern get different levels). That's actually an issue with "mainstream" releases, they can't focus on a single direction while trying to appeal to a very broad audience.

I think those are really two different things. Uncharted and Tomb Raider (I assume, I haven't seen much of the latter) use one main gameplay style, but it's robust enough that it can do different things. There are some areas that focus on traversal and some that focus on combat, but the mechanics aren't entirely separate, it's not like you're trading out one moveset for another. The game can put the focus on one or the other, or it can challenge you with both at once (I know for sure that a big part of Uncharted is using your traversal mechanics to get the drop on enemies), or it can quickly and seamlessly alternate between the two. Uncharted might have you climb a wall, stealth takedown a guy, swing from a grapple, and shoot another guy in mid swing, and that keeps traversal and combat linked, even if they're not used together constantly over the whole game.

On the other hand with 3D Sonic games the mechanics are entirely separate. There's absolutely no interplay between, for example, the boost and the grappling hook, because the two abilities exist on entirely different characters in entirely different levels.

  • Thumbs Up 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Nepenthe said:

I'm not sure I agree with calling Uncharted and Tomb Raider half platformers and half TPS, in the same way I wouldn't designate Forza as one third casual racing simulator, one third collectathon, and one third art program, and that's mainly due to the degree of integration between mechanics within the overall design. They're games that use really broad mechanics from other games to build and service single design, which could all be broadly be summed up as just the "third-person action-adventure" genre anyway. 

Sonic Gens and Sonic Forces don't have any meaningful level of integration. The physics, move-sets, abilties, and level design are all significantly different and existing within their own spheres apart from each other that they could technically be taken out wholesale and served as their own games (I mean, that's what modders did with Unleashed, but even then I'd argue Unleashed serves much better as a "single game" than Gens and Forces). You try to divorce the platforming from Uncharted and Tomb Raider, and you're talking about having to fundamentally change player progression from area to area, which in turn fundamentally changes things like the player abilities, level design, enemy location and behavior, how objectives are reached, etc.

In general, most mediums and works blend multiple rules and characteristics of genre to certain degrees, which I think is just the inevitability of both human inspiration and the inadequacy of our methods of categorization. However, most don't really do this with hard lines between each. There's either a natural sense of progression or integration with other mechanics that makes them inseparable from one another when taken as whole products.

To put this in other words, there is quite a difference between the implementation of multiple (and contradictory) gameplay styles and the natural, stylistic overlap between genres.  I also wouldn't really call Tomb Raider a platformer just because a prominent aspect of the game happens to be traversing platforms any more than I would say that funk music is essentially rock music simply because they both make heavy use of the electric guitar.  In our current conception of games, there's a lot of overlap between genres, because, in essence, the goal is the same for most conflict-driven games.  Get from Point A. to Point B. while eliminating (and/or avoiding being eliminated by) obstacles.

Meanwhile, Sonic actually DOES implement other, more alien gameplay styles.  It would arguably more akin to the way EA's take on the James Bond games often had a genre roulette between first- (and later third-) person shooters, two or three driving segments per game, and multiple on-rail shooter segments.  I'm at a loss for the proper words to explain why I think this form of genre roulette is actually acceptable in my opinion, compared to Sonic's clash between 2D and 3D platforming, so I'm not going to try to justify it.  But I do think it works better in the aforementioned Bond titles than it does with Sonic, in any case.

  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Nepenthe said:

Overall, Classic Sonic is the current poster child to the identity issues and unnecessary compartmentalizing of gameplay mechanics people had a problem with from SA1 onwards. He just gets a freer pass than most because he's Classic Sonic.

Its funny but I'd say that Modern Sonic is the figurative embodiment of everything that has gone wrong since Sonic transitioned into 3D gaming. I'm not impressed by classic Sonic in the boost games but Modern Sonic has had an identity crisis since his inception that hasn't gone away. A big reason why classic even exists in the Modern games is because Modern Sonic's 3D gameplay literally has not stood on its own for one single game. Not one. The closest was Colors and that game was probably 75% 2D....and if you're predominantly going to be a 2D series, we have an app for that....

Mind you, I like both Colors and Generations but its obvious that Modern Sonic is, fundamentally, a flawed 3D platformer. If someone can come up with a better concept for 3D sonic that allows for smoother platforming elements and more efficient level design, I think Sonic Team has a lot to gain by getting rid of Modern Sonic altogether. A whole lot, actually. Just by virtue of Modern's disappearance, Sonic general gaming reputation would skyrocket out of the gutter its been in for almost 2 decades now. Modern Sonic, from a brand perspective, has been primarily associated with mediocrity. Classic Sonic, with excellence and it is readily apparent.

 

That's just me though, I suppose....

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it off-topic? I am just gonna do a hot take. Modern Sonic and Custom Hero are likely to not ever fight with Eggman, and Classic Sonic's is the only to fight him. Kinda like in SA2, Tails was the only to fight Eggman

. A big reason why classic even exists in the Modern games is because Modern Sonic's 3D gameplay literally has not stood on its own for one single game. Not one.

Sonic Heroes? 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Modern Sonic not standing on its own is not necessarily an issue with the gameplay so much as it is Sonic Team just padding the games.

Package the Modern Sonic levels from Gens, or hell even the daytime stages from Unleashed, into a standalone game connected with classic-like cut scenes and transitions, and sell it for like $30 or $40. I don't see the problem with this even if it's not my ideal type of game design.

  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm also fully for the boost games just being short budget games if it means we can just get a fully 3D one without the padding, really starting to get tired of "its a 3D sonic game...but its 70% 2D" thing we've had as of late and it just makes me wish that sega would drop one of the two and just focus on one so that the game can be specifically designed with only that view point in mind, I wouldn't even mind if they just dropped 3D in general because the sonic rush games were great and those were only in 2D so why doesn't sonic team just throw the whole 3D thing to the wind, maybe let somebody else handle it since it seems like they're hesitant on really messing with the 3D world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Nepenthe said:

Package the Modern Sonic levels from Gens, or hell even the daytime stages from Unleashed, into a standalone game connected with classic-like cut scenes and transitions, and sell it for like $30 or $40.

As much as I'd be the first person in the room to pre-order the collectors edition of said game, it a bad mentality to get into simply because it backs Sonic Team into an all-too-familiar corner.

You can only get away with doing that once. Maybe twice before the devs will be forced to reconvene at drawing board asking themselves the pivotal question. "What now?" If you don't catch my drift, that is the exact same question they will be asking themselves post-forces. How do we innovate what we have and continue to be profitable.

Giving up and making half a game at a budget price only serves to kick the can a handful of years. At some point, if Sonic is going to continue to move forward as a series, Sonic Team is either going to have to come up with a new formula, revert to an old formula or simply figure out a better way to manage the boost formula to the point where it can have the content necessary to make a full game.

They attempted something new with Lost World. That was a slower, asset friendly style that I am sure the dev's hoped would stick just for the sake of ease of development. It didn't so they quickly went back to what worked. They could go back to something more akin to the Adventure games, however the problems with that style are well documented and I think they may have been made more gun-shy about an SA3 following the S4 fiasco. They tried slowing Sonic down and adding more 2D in Colors and Forces. Only time will tell if the slower pace will lead to any quality innovations in platforming in Forces. Color's blocky attempts did not inspire confidence, nor the building blocks for the future. 

Still the point stands. They need to figure something out. We know they can't make enough assets to make a whole game of Unleashed style stages. Funnily, enough, the answer to that IMO isn't to slow Sonic down, but to add more platforming segments (particularly in 3D) that will do that job for you. (The plank walk in the beginning of Jungle Joyride and The giant Tree at the end of Savannah Citadel is a great example of that). Making a budget game will have the same effect as padding the next game with Classic Sonic. It just buys the devs two more years to twiddle their thumbs and try and figure out where they go next.

Somethings gotta give. My bet is Classic/alternate playstyles will go by the wayside before the boost, but that's just me.

  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ChikaBoing said:

Sonic Heroes?

I think they were referring to the Unleashed/Colours/Generations/Forces Modern Sonic playstyle only.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Nepenthe said:

Modern Sonic not standing on its own is not necessarily an issue with the gameplay so much as it is Sonic Team just padding the games.

Package the Modern Sonic levels from Gens, or hell even the daytime stages from Unleashed, into a standalone game connected with classic-like cut scenes and transitions, and sell it for like $30 or $40. I don't see the problem with this even if it's not my ideal type of game design.

If its not an issue, why hasn't it been done yet? This is the fourth "Boost" game and yet we're seeing the exact same trend.

Sonic Team pads the 3D games because there is an issue with the gameplay. I'm fairly certain this has been admitted as much by them as well, though I'd have to dig for links.

Maybe Sonic's goals should not be as lofty and the games stay shorter and charge less, as you mention. Ultimately I can't say you're wrong about that but I will have you remember that Sonic is still one of the most recognizable characters and IPs in gaming history. He really should be capable of putting out a AAA big budget title that can rival the best of the best....

1 hour ago, ChikaBoing said:

Sonic Heroes? 

 

 

Well, Heroes does not do any 2D sections. If it does anything fundamentally wrong, its that the gameplay itself is just so decidedly mediocre. The character roulette (multi-character campaign) also makes it different to evaluate than more traditional titles like SA1 or SA2.

It is considered a main game in this series, so I'll give you that. Its Modern Sonic but not of the boost variant. But it is just as gimmicky as the games before it and the games after.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Sega DogTagz I didn't mean to characterize my idea as literally taking levels from existing games and reselling them. 

I meant to say, if Gens had instead been intentionally made and released without the classic gameplay and characters altogether, and perhaps at $40, nothing would've been lost at the end of the day.

I agree with you however that this probably delays the inevitable of figuring out a better style, at least until people get sick of it (but I can't tell whether or not general gamers are sick of it, and if they are if it's because of its similarities to Gens or on its own merits), but my argument in general is that it's not impossible to sell a modern only game. They just don't want to.

@UpCDownCLeftCRightC The cited issue is that the game would be short without padding.

My response to that is "So what?"

Either pad the game's longevity with more elegant options: a proper but punishing difficulty curve and/or Unleashed-esque alternate acts that prevents people from blazing through in 4 hours, or throw in alternate characters with the same gameplay but different levels/level order. Or sell the game for less than $50. If you're gonna bank on a style that you feel is too labor intensive to make annual, that doesn't mean people are entitled to appreciate any diversions you throw in there that are nonsensical or not fun.

  • Thumbs Up 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Nepenthe said:

@Sega DogTagz I didn't mean to characterize my idea as literally taking levels from existing games and reselling them. 

Yeah I got that much. I think we are on the same page here.

 

 

1 minute ago, Nepenthe said:

I meant to say, if Gens had instead been intentionally made and released without the classic gameplay and characters altogether, and perhaps at $40, nothing would've been lost at the end of the day.

I agree with you however that this probably delays the inevitable of figuring out a better style, at least until people get sick of it (but I can't tell whether or not general gamers are sick of it, and if they are if it's because of its similarities to Gens or on its own merits), but my argument in general is that it's not impossible to sell a modern only game. They just don't want to.

I think a standalone Boost game would fair fine on the market, and would probably do well enough critically if it was budget priced.

But we both understand that it only leads in a circle back to where we are sitting right now. I'd personally rather Sonic Team put in the time and effort into figuring out Sonic's future now, rather than watching them opt to shrug and come back to the problem in four years. That's probably why we haven't seen it yet to be honest. Doing so would be the development equivalent of sending up a white flag for 3D Sonic games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, the circle is different for everyone. I'm more concerned with aesthetics and storytelling at this point because I don't see any real need to worry about the mechanical competency of the games anymore, and in general I still have fun with the gameplay even if I have preferences between the different incarnations. I wouldn't mind a few cheapie games like that, and in general if they just farmed out the development if said games to another dev they could get on with focusing on with advancing the franchise.

But they're probably gonna tie themselves up with the 30th anniversary game with modern Sonic, classic Sonic, Buddy, and probably Boom Sonic for good measure.

  • Thumbs Up 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Nepenthe said:

@Sega DogTagz I didn't mean to characterize my idea as literally taking levels from existing games and reselling them. 

I meant to say, if Gens had instead been intentionally made and released without the classic gameplay and characters altogether, and perhaps at $40, nothing would've been lost at the end of the day.

I agree with you however that this probably delays the inevitable of figuring out a better style, at least until people get sick of it (but I can't tell whether or not general gamers are sick of it, and if they are if it's because of its similarities to Gens or on its own merits), but my argument in general is that it's not impossible to sell a modern only game. They just don't want to.

@UpCDownCLeftCRightC The cited issue is that the game would be short without padding.

My response to that is "So what?"

Either pad the game's longevity with more elegant options: a proper but punishing difficulty curve and/or Unleashed-esque alternate acts that prevents people from blazing through in 4 hours, or throw in alternate characters with the same gameplay but different levels/level order. Or sell the game for less than $50. If you're gonna bank on a style that you feel is too labor intensive to make annual, that doesn't mean people are entitled to appreciate any diversions you throw in there that are nonsensical or not fun.

I actually don't have a problem with a game being short, at all. You're talking to a guy who will never stop playing S3K, and that game only takes 3 hours when you absolutely want it to. The key for me with games is always in replay value. I don't care how long a game is if its not fun to play. Sonic is a platformer, and a unique one at that, so his games will be their nature be much shorter than a more serious story-driven genre like Zelda, or any run of the mill RPG game. But if they're fun and rewarding to play, time has shown us that that is really what matters at the end of the day. But we also have to be honest and acknowledge that the market today is different than it was in 1995. I can see a lot of people having a problem paying north of $50 for a game that only takes 3 hours to beat.

But this is a different problem as well. Boost style games are not efficient because of the developmental time cost. The levels are huge and take lots of man hours to build, which obviously costs more money. If you're the CEO of a company and you've got two products but one costs 4-5 times the production and time to make, you'd probably hope that it makes 4-5 times as much money as the other one or else you're not doing your job. Additionally, for a variety of reasons, Modern Sonic games aren't selling well in proportion to the recognition of the IP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't hate classic sonic in forces, nor did I in Generations, it's just way more plain than original classic sonic. Gens/Forces classic fun lasts for a while, but gets boring quickly due to its more automated and unimaginative gameplay mechanics. Original classics are still fun because the physics let you fool with the game in so many ways.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"You know what? F@$k it. We're screwed/d@$ned no matter what we do. Lets make Sonic Adventure 3 everyone and call it quits." - ST

Seems like it's pretty much hitting that point. You've got the events and tone as well as the multiple-character revolving plot going on in Forces, now all they have to do is erase the boost game play and 2D game play and the next title can quite literally be just that, albeit perhaps not going by that name specifically.

Despite folks counterarguments against my stance, I really think Forces just shows how broke Sonic Team is and how poor they are at managing their budgets for games. They can't even afford an AAA boost game yet here they are trying to push for it nonetheless and causing more chaos with the consumers than the chaos in the game itself.

I can bet the game will have more 2D than colors had with that thought in mind since the majority of the budget is likely going towards dozens of actors and all the thematic scenarios in the background. This is what happens when you make a game in denial of your circumstances and paint a wall in front of yourself with "everything's fine" clear across it.

tenor.gif

Glad I'm not on ST's ship.

  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On top of what everyone else already said, I'd also like to say that I honestly just don't prefer the 2D gameplay.

I know Sonic Team and SEGA seem to think otherwise, but the existence of Sonic in a 3D space is something that's been around for well over 15 years at this point. If every Sonic game is someone's first, then it stands to reason some people would naturally grow up liking what the 3D games offered.

One of those things was "actual" 3D and despite what some may think, how it feels, looks, and what it contributes to the game's overall atmosphere does have an effect based on that. 

However, nowadays, if you're a 3D fan, you're being forced to settle with a game that's mostly 2D and 2.5D with your only other alternative being another 2D game or a game that's in 3D but is forcing you to do the Olympics with Mario. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Monkey Destruction Switch said:

There are multiple reasons I'm not thrilled with Classic Sonic's inclusion in Forces, but I think for me, the biggest reason is probably that classic Sonic and modern Sonic are the same character and I don't want them to be two separate characters.

This pretty much hits the nail on the head for me. I really hate the idea of Modern Sonic and Classic Sonic being two completely separate characters. I'm admittedly a bit of a classic fanboy and prefer the classic design over the modern one, but I'd rather not see the classic design in the 3D games at all if it just means that he's going to play more of a cutesy sidekick role to Modern Sonic.

As far as gameplay, I liked the classic gameplay well enough in Generations, but with Forces coming out right after Mania, it's going to make the flaws a lot more apparent in Sonic Team's version of Classic Sonic.

  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

His inclusion in Generations was neat and felt alright for an anniversary title celebrating the twenty long years the franchise existed. While I was already growing weary of Classic insertion after Sonic 4, it was neat.

His inclusion in Forces feels, much like the title, forced. It's like SEGA keeps trying to apologize, especially with all the constant throwbacks we've been getting from 4, and Lost World. You like, cake, right? It's tasty and is nice to have every once in a while. You eat enough of that stuff, you'll get sick. Maybe even sick OF it.

I'm growing sick of Classic Sonic and it's starting to make me turn on the old games entirely. Even 3&K, which, up to this point, was my 3rd favorite Sonic title.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/24/2017 at 1:28 PM, JezMM said:

To be honest, while I would be impressed by their effort if Forces Classic had physics-based platforming gameplay like in Mania, and it would make me FORGIVE the act of including him... the act of including him would still bug me on some level, because it's once again a denial of a proper all-out 3D Sonic game using the gameplay that Unleashed pioneered.

Like, I and many others want a 3D Modern Sonic game, but I only ever get half or less of one every single time.  To suggest Classic Sonic in Forces is fine as long as it's fun would be to suggest that putting 3D Modern Sonic sections in Sonic Mania would be fine as long as they're fun.

^ This...

This right here...why on earth would anyone want that!? Do you know how pissed people would get if Sega dropped that on everyone?

This is what I don't get, multiple characters only works if its done very carefully and with great purpose. Otherwise, your almost always better off dealing with 1 gameplay style and build up that style to be the best it can be.

Is this really that hard to understand? We all want better games...but it seems some people are fine taking a much much MUCH slower route to get there. (or in forces case taking 1 step fowards and 2 steps back)

  • Thumbs Up 1
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.