Why don't you take Sonic seriously?

[Dr. Mechano]

Just now, Nintendoga said:

Tails and Sonic's rift and the sudden change of tone near the end with Sonic's friends and Eggman "dying" gave off the impression of a sad attempt at a more serious story to me.

I mean, it had its moments, but the overall tone was still pretty lighthearted I'd say. Which I'm fine with.

Lost World was far from ideal, but it was way closer to how I'd like to see 3D games written than Shadow or 2k6 were.

[Diogenes]

3 minutes ago, Razorsaw said:

it's a bug combined with a motorcycle. His arms are spiky blades. He's not the most threatening robot in the world but he's not exactly cuddly in the same way other villain bad guys are.

It's a ladybug with a wheel and little pokey hands. If there's a difference between this and Mario enemies, it is, again, a hair's width.

[Tyranno]

14 minutes ago, Dr. Mechano said:

Oh, sure. I don't even disagree.

But in his first appearance, Metal Sonic was just a boss, not the main villain of the game. In his subsequent appearances, like in Triple Trouble for example, he also just appeared as a boss fight, making him scarcely different from Silver Sonic or Mecha Sonic.

It wasn't until Heroes that they tried making him a full-on solo villain in his own right, and... well, that didn't go so well, did it? So really, I agree with you; Metal Sonic works great as a boss and as an obstacle, but in Sega's one attempt to make him an actual antagonist with his own motivation, he failed to be a compelling villain. 

I don't think Heroes' narrative neccessarily failed because of who they chose to use as the bad guy, I think it failed because the story is so piecemeal and the methods chosen to tell the story weren't very good for conveying what they wanted at all.

But before that, Metal was the primary antagonist for the OVA, which used him well in a story that gave him a moderate amount of pathos. The gist of character was the basis for comic storylines in StC and Archie that were well recieved and went in multiple directions. Metal CAN carry a story, it's just Heroes doesn't tell it's story very well.

Chaos in Adventure is similar; he's comprised of a lot of elements that are traditionally considered cool, his story is solidly based on tragedy, and his final boss form is directly ripped from a successful kaiju franchise. He's "as focus grouped" as Metal, Shadow, or Infinite, and he worked very well in my opinion.

EDIT - I botched the quotes here, so I'm gonna clarify that the last two comments here are mine.

Quote

And his story

and his character design

And his personality

and having a personality

and the people he hands out with

And his powers

And his connection to dr eggman

Scary blood-red eyes? Sharp claws? Built to be better than Sonic at his own game?

Design-wise, he was Shadow before Shadow was ever Shadow.

[Dr. Mechano]

Just now, Diogenes said:

It's a ladybug with a wheel and little pokey hands. If there's a difference between this and Mario enemies, it is, again, a hair's width.

With that said, I can still take Motobugs more seriously than I can the Black Arms in the context of this universe.

[Kuzu]

4 minutes ago, Razorsaw said:

it's a bug combined with a motorcycle. His arms are spiky blades. He's not the most threatening robot in the world but he's not exactly cuddly in the same way other villain bad guys are.

The point is that it's not the "seriousness" that you're trying to sell the series as.

You're talking about concepts and theories, things that are not tangible or can be judged. If you're trying to sell that Sonic has "always" been as serious as you're trying to sell it as, give actual physical evidence instead of intangible hypothericals.

[Dr. Mechano]

Just now, Razorsaw said:

But before that, Metal was the primary antagonist for the OVA, which used him well in a story that gave him a moderate amount of pathos. The gist of character was the basis for comic storylines in StC and Archie that were well recieved and went in multiple directions. Metal CAN carry a story, it's just Heroes doesn't tell it's story very well.

Honestly, I'm open to another game that attempts to write him as an actual character again.

Maybe actually see him and Eggman interacting. I feel like that's one reason I have trouble taking his betrayal seriously; We were given no buildup or motivation to it. The two characters never even directly spoke to each other once. 

[Badnik Mechanic]

1 hour ago, havikinazuma said:

If he was a short human character that moved fast would his story additons be as ridiculous? 

You just described both The Flash and Billy Whizz from the Beano And they're polar opposites in terms of "Silly".

But Sonic bring serious. Nah it's not. It's really not. People who claim it is. It's not.

Even the so called examples of serious Sonic games. The ones that get dragged out of the first kicking and screaming, The Sonic Adventures, yeah... big serious final moment... all that stuff prior it.

Lol completely.

[Tyranno]

2 minutes ago, Kuzu the Boloedge said:

The point is that it's not the "seriousness" that you're trying to sell the series as.

You're talking about concepts and theories, things that are not tangible or can be judged. If you're trying to sell that Sonic has "always" been as serious as you're trying to sell it as, give actual physical evidence instead of intangible hypothericals.

I've talked about the characters and how they've been used and tried to analyze the visual style of the series. I don't know what more "non-hypothericals" you want.

2 minutes ago, Dr. Mechano said:

Honestly, I'm open to another game that attempts to write him as an actual character again.

Maybe actually see him and Eggman interacting. I feel like that's one reason I have trouble taking his betrayal seriously; We were given no buildup or motivation to it. The two characters never even directly spoke to each other once. 

Sure, but that comes down to how the story is approached rather than how it's told, isn't it? That's different from saying Metal should just be used as a minor antagonist rather than a character.

[Dr. Mechano]

Just now, Razorsaw said:

Sure, but that comes down to how the story is approached rather than how it's told, isn't it? That's different from saying Metal should just be used as a minor antagonist rather than a character.

While that's fair, I feel that if he were actually written like a person and less like a one-note evil rival whose sole existence is based around the hero, he wouldn't come across as a hackneyed, focus-groupy character. He'd come across as nuanced enough to be interesting or likable, or both.

As it stands, the personality they went with for him is on the same level as modern Sonic's various one-shot villains. That is to say, there's not much of one at all.

[Tyranno]

8 minutes ago, Dr. Mechano said:

While that's fair, I feel that if he were actually written like a person and less like a one-note evil rival whose sole existence is based around the hero, he wouldn't come across as a hackneyed, focus-groupy character. He'd come across as nuanced enough to be interesting or likable, or both.

As it stands, the personality they went with for him is on the same level as modern Sonic's various one-shot villains. That is to say, there's not much of one at all.

But they have. I pointed out three instances where the franchise took that base character and did exactly that.

I can't help but feel if they tried the story from the Sonic OVA in the games we'd have as many endless discussions about how overwrought the ending was in its attempts for drama and feelings as we do, say, Shadow's backstory. The fandom's standards for how much is too much drama or how shallow is too shallow just comes off as increasingly more and more arbitrary.

Would you honestly say Heroes' story is one that tries too hard to be serious? It resembles Lost World more than it does Sonic 2006. Heck I'd argue that it doesn't try hard ENOUGH to develop its story or its villain.

[havikinazuma]

23 minutes ago, Indigo Rush said:

I was introduced to Sonic at a time when it was a cartoon and video game character that liked eating chili dogs, saving cute bunnies and breaking a fat guy's toys. Any attempts to make it serious only makes it funnier to me. 

That said, I took SatAM seriously when I was young. Saving the rainforest from being a polluted wasteland? Talking animals being turned into metal? Sign me up brah.

In hindsight it was still dumb. But whatever floats your boat.

Like you, I was also a 90s kid, who  play the classics and watched SatAM(as well as AoStH), and I loved then too, but unlike you, I don't feel as nostalgic for them.., 

[Dr. Mechano]

1 minute ago, Razorsaw said:

But they have. I pointed out three instances where the franchise took that base character and did exactly that.

I can't help but feel if they tried the story from the Sonic OVA in the games we'd have as many endless discussions about how overwrought the ending was in its attempts for drama and feelings as we do, say, Shadow's backstory. The fandom's standards for how much is too much drama or how shallow is too shallow just comes off as increasingly more and more arbitrary.

Would you honestly say Heroes' story is one that tries too hard to be serious? It resembles Lost World more than it does Sonic 2006. Heck I'd argue that it doesn't try hard ENOUGH to develop its story or its villain.

One of Heroes' big problems is that it focuses on so much at one time that none of it carries any weight.

Metal Sonic's betrayed Eggman! Some other robot we've never even seen before has betrayed Eggman! Shadow's back from the dead suddenly! And he has amnesia! And he might be a clone!

I cannot be expected to care about any of these things if the game doesn't justify them somehow or get me invested with some degree of buildup. Seeing a character who's never spoken to Eggman, or - in Omega's a case - a character who's never even existed until now suddenly betray Eggman doesn't carry any emotional weight. I'm not going to care or be shocked or what have you because I don't know these characters or their relationship to Eggman. They might as well have always been free agents because their "betrayal" ultimately adds nothing to their character or the plot as a whole.

And I think this is the crux of the matter; Sonic Team keeps expecting us to care about or get invested in things that they frankly do not earn through good storytelling.

[Multikaris]

26 minutes ago, Diogenes said:

It's a ladybug with a wheel and little pokey hands. If there's a difference between this and Mario enemies, it is, again, a hair's width.

But it lessened the cuteness as it went on. Despite still being animals, they got rather mean-looking and angular as they went on. The explosive starfish had a dead red mechanical eye, even. Even the bomb with little legs is implied to kill a little animal inside.

[Kuzu]

32 minutes ago, Razorsaw said:

I've talked about the characters and how they've been used and tried to analyze the visual style of the series. I don't know what more "non-hypothericals" you want.

And the characters are usually one of the reviled parts of the series by everyone that's not already a Modern Sonic fan, why do you think that is? And I don't know what you're trying to say about the visual style. Maybe it's just me, but where do you get "serious" and "epic" from something like this. or this.

And the usual examples that people cite of Sonic being "serious" or "epic" are the parts of the series that are usually ridiculed the most :\

[Osmium]

I put Sonic on about the same level of seriousness as Rocko's Modern Life or Animaniacs. It's a cartoon. 

[Diogenes]

18 minutes ago, Miru the Living Planet said:

But it lessened the cuteness as it went on. Despite still being animals, they got rather mean-looking and angular as they went on.

The vast majority of badniks throughout the classics are fairly cutesy or at least cartoonishly light. The few abstract and relatively intimidating ones do not in any way invalidate or override things like the penguin, butterfly, and (computer) mouse badniks.

18 minutes ago, Miru the Living Planet said:

Even the bomb with little legs is implied to kill a little animal inside.

...

No.

[Osmium]

tbh I feel like the people who are so adamant to say the badniks are "dark" and "not cute" are just afraid to admit they like something that appeals to little kids.  

[Multikaris]

6 minutes ago, Diogenes said:

The vast majority of badniks throughout the classics are fairly cutesy or at least cartoonishly light. The few abstract and relatively intimidating ones do not in any way invalidate or override things like the penguin, butterfly, and (computer) mouse badniks.

...

No.

1) I didn't just mean stuff like Toxomeister and Ferron. I meant things that look fairly nasty and mean DESPITE being fiddler crabs and tortoises and whatnot. 

2) What? They were labeled as badniks in the manual, meaning they must have been stuffed with some unfortunate animal suicide bombers.

[Osmium]

2 minutes ago, Miru the Living Planet said:

2) What? They were labeled as badniks in the manual, meaning they must have been stuffed with some unfortunate animal suicide bombers.

Not all badniks have animals inside. The ones in CD had seeds in them, I think it's safe to assume there was nothing in those ones. They're just bombs with feet. 

[Kuzu]

Even Modern games aren't as serious as people make them out to be All of the time.

Like come on, you know what are the msot featured Badniks in Modern games that aren't from the Classic games?

These fuckers.

Oooohhh, so menacing.

Look how serious and edgy these guys are.

 

[ThePrinceOfSaiyans]

I don't mind a serious tone, as long as it's presented in a way that makes sense in the context of it being about an anthropomorphic blue hedgehog with super speed and an attitude. Investing us in these characters and throwing them into dire situations is fine. It can be done without being seen as forced or edgy, the problem is that a lot of times it is. I.E. Sonic '06, Shadow the Hedgehog, and bits of Sonic Lost World. How you do it right is, well, Sonic Adventure, I guess. Sonic Adventure 2 is probably the example to look to when you wanna ask the question, when is it too far? I'd say Sonic Adventure 2 is on the precipice. Maybe Shadow's backstory is a little too out of place for a series like this, but I'd argue that's the edge of the meter stick, if you will. 

[GentlemanX]

I take Sonic seriously, or at least as seriously as any other kids action adventure franchise.

I think it's true that Sonic has really had two outings that could be considered overly serious: ShTH and 06. Even then, ShTH is mostly too serious because of its implications - you still have tons of silly moments like Circus Park, the Chaotix, and Sonic's always upbeat attitude (Diabalon fight excluded). 06 is probably the most serious story in the franchise's history - Amy mistaking Silver for Sonic being the only levity I can think of. I think 06 does a better job of conveying it's story though, it's probably too serious for Sonic but it is at least consistent unlike ShTH.

But honestly, outside of those two I don't think anything else is overly serious. SA1 and SA2 can be super goofy - they just put a greater emphasis on narrative and characterization than the Genesis games did. I think having a general sense of fun is the only prerequisite needed to keep Sonic feeling like Sonic. If you still get that, you've got Sonic down. If not, you're probably better off saving that work for something else. For the record - I'm not judging Forces so far, I don't think I've seen enough to judge how it will handle it's setup. Sonic's personality in the Infinite trailer certainly gives faith they won't be at 06 levels.

As for other media, I can sorta see the argument for SatAM, Archie, and Fleetway being too serious - but I can't say I'd agree they are. SatAM is literally a Saturday morning cartoon where the main character has multiple catchphrases. Robotnik is a lot grittier than Eggman but I think that's negligible as a clear reinterpretation. Archie has had moments of seriousness, but I think never sacrifices the fun of Sonic's SatAM and Sega counterparts. Never for very long at any rate. Fleetway Sonic meanwhile is very similar to SatAM in that Robotnik is a lot more serious than Eggman and stories can have overly serious elements to them - but the main heroes never lose their sense of fun keeping in line with the rest of the franchise. I do think Fleetway has a lot less goofy elements compared to SatAM and Archie though - but it still has plenty.

So again, yes I treat Sonic seriously but only to the point where it doesn't lose it's sense of fun. And I think most Sonic products across the board are fun.

[Diogenes]

1 minute ago, Miru the Living Planet said:

1) I didn't just mean stuff like Toxomeister and Ferron. I meant things that look fairly nasty and mean DESPITE being fiddler crabs and tortoises and whatnot. 

None of the classic badniks are actually particularly nasty; some may have spikes or shoot energy balls or whatever but almost universally they're still far more in line with the "cute" designs like Motobug than the generic "serious" robots like GUN 'bots or Eggman's robots from '06.

1 minute ago, Miru the Living Planet said:

2) What? They were labeled as badniks in the manual, meaning they must have been stuffed with some unfortunate animal suicide bombers.

No, you're merely assuming there's an animal being killed because it furthers your point. This is like thinking that the Jawz enemy from Hydrocity not releasing an animal if it runs into you and explodes means the animal is meant to have been killed, rather than it being a simple oversight.

10 minutes ago, Kuzu the Boloedge said:

Even Modern games aren't as serious as people make them out to be All of the time.

Like come on, you know what are the msot featured Badniks in Modern games that aren't from the Classic games?

These fuckers.

Oooohhh, so menacing.

Yeah but most of their appearances were after the series turned away from Adventure era "seriousness", and they were introduced in the least "serious" Adventure era game. You don't see robots like this in SA2 or '06.

[Shadowlax]

1 hour ago, Razorsaw said:

Scary blood-red eyes? Sharp claws? Built to be better than Sonic at his own game?

Shadow doesn't have claws, and Knuckles also posed a challenge to sonic.

All you got is red eyes. 

Sonic gets red eyes when he goes super, I guess he's metal sonic now

[Kuzu]

Sonic Adventure and Sonic Adventure 2 I feel are pretty borderline, but they still fit enough in the series to not be too out of place. The Last Story of Sonic Adventure 2 notwithstanding, but that's explicitly the very end of the game. But they are pre-cursors to what would start being the norm after Heroes.

 

2 minutes ago, Diogenes said:

Yeah but most of their appearances were after the series turned away from Adventure era "seriousness", and they were introduced in the least "serious" Adventure era game. You don't see robots like this in SA2 or '06.

Yea, but they are featured in Shadow. And like I said, they're most featured in Modern games. I was pointing out that most Modern games aren't as serious as people like to think. It's just the ones that are are notoriously bad.