Jump to content
Awoo.

Should the Sonic Franchise get new, better developers?


Mountaindewandsprite

Recommended Posts

To me, it's a bit on both ends as to why Sonic's track record (especially the 3D outings) isn't the best. We've got influential fans who seemingly can't make up their minds on what exactly they want without getting a good game out of it, and that's just my assumption on this matter, excuse me if I'm wrong.
And on the other side the developers can't seem to find the balance between what fans really want in the series and what constitute for good level/mechanic design.

So I do agree that the franchise should get a fresh batch of developers who know how to make Sonic work again as a platformer and have grown up with the series in order to understand it. Whitehead and Taxman did this to Mania, so I really am curious to see if other noteworthy fan developers for 3D Sonic engines/games also can get their feet in the door at SEGA.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Space☆Yeow said:

Iizuka himself is on record for saying the game started development after Lost World in the Famitsu April 2017 interview; and even with Nakamura's Famitsu November 2017 interview clarifying that the game shifted into full production for its last year, he also still describes Forces' first year of production spent on HE2 engine development (done specifically for this game) and the two years of production the developers spent working on the game to some capacity. If we're going to handwave all of this as unimportant, then that begs the question as to exactly what are we to assume they were doing those past three years? 

Decide they were either sitting on their hands the entire time or were busy working on another game before deciding to bumrush Forces together at the last minute? If that's their supposed methods towards handling multiple projects at the same time and/or their general workflow approach to building games, then that makes them look absolutely inept at their jobs. Deduce the game's production cycle spiraled out of control a la Rise of Lyric? That isn't really supported by any material that goes stronger than circulating rumors/speculation. Forces is functionally complete and doesn't have critical absent chunks of material that was either excised or hidden in the game's files. There isn't really anything concrete about Forces that implies anything on RoL's level of mishap and misfortune happened.

I'm not handwaving it, I'm more or less saying that something probably happened that changed circumstances in a way that changed Sonic Team's timeline and priorities. They started off thinking they had plenty of time to work on making the engine beautiful, but were suddenly hit with a new deadline that forced them to drop the engine work and get going on the game itself. Its not some false dichotomy of they did nothing for three years or they did a lot of things. They can start the long process of making an engine for three years (so they weren't doing nothing), and they can also hit problems and unexpected happenings along the way that makes a lot of their work invisible or a moot point.

I never said that Sonic Team itself was the one that made the decision-- its possible Sega imposed it on them, whether to have something out soon to quell complaints about the time void or to have something out to coincide with Mania. Its supported in the game too-- not every rushed game has critical absent chunks of material, sometimes its seemingly subtle things like hidden section of a level that couldn't be fixed in time or characters in cutscenes that are blatantly being set up as boss fights but are never actually fought. These aren't just rumor and speculation-- they're in the game.

You may not believe it concrete, but it is there and I do think it worth examining or at least respecting.

6 hours ago, Space☆Yeow said:

A pretty fascinating analysis for a game Sega/ST held under wraps as the final reveal for their 25th birthday party, a game that was declared to commemorate (alongside Mania) the series' 25th anniversary, the game headlined as the "major" Sonic release of 2017 (Mania despite getting the more positive buzz/reviews at the end of the day still had the relatively lower budget and distribution/marketing strategy); and a game the publisher/studio went out of their way to promote "from the team that brought you Sonic Colors and Sonic Generations" from the very first teaser despite the studio's most recent game being Lost World. If that's not an attempt by Sega/ST to try and promote Forces as something a tad more important than any standard / smaller Sonic release,  like the mobile titles or Boom: Fire & Ice; then I honestly don't know what is.

Like I said. People motivated to hold the fans accountable for the messes that Sega/ST made isn't shocking but still absolutely lost on me.

I was never specifically holding the fans accountable for Sega and Sonic Team's fuck-ups, in fact I even say this (bolding mine):

8 hours ago, Mad Convoy said:

for which I pass no negative judgement on the fans for, but which I point out does not necessarily mean Sega and Sonic Team had the same desires or intent in making the game.

Its nothing like what you said, I have no motivation to blame the fans, its lost on me too. And have said on several occasions that company fuckups aren't the consumer's fault and that mentality is oftentimes a poor excuse for bad behavior. As I was hoping would be clear but was evidently lost, I'm not saying the fans are to blame for thinking that way. It does, on the surface, have the look of a big Sonic title, but notice that it mostly appears in marketing, much of which was outright cancelled. Nothing in the actual game indicates such, and its not like the series lacks precedent for this-- remember Sonic 4's marketing in America? But false hype is a real thing, and it creates more disappointment than anybody really needs or the game merits.

Again, maybe it is rumor and speculation, but until we know exactly what went down, that's all anybody's guess is. Most I ask for is for people to entertain more than black and white viewpoints on opinions. There's no dichotomies here. I disagree with you, but that doesn't automatically mean I believe the exact opposite as you in every way and must be dismissed and spoken to accordingly. I especially do not appreciate baseless accusations about my blaming the fans, which are very clearly untrue and evidence of the black and white thinking I was speaking of earlier.

 

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But who can you trick into making Sonic games in 2018? Going all the way back to when Yasuhara decided that he had no more tears to shed for the franchise, there is a long history of internal development people being crushed in spirit and going to Nintendo or Sony; and there's a decent list of mismanagement of outside developers as well.

  • Thumbs Up 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Tornado said:

But who can you trick into making Sonic games in 2018? Going all the way back to when Yasuhara decided that he had no more tears to shed for the franchise, there is a long history of internal development people being crushed in spirit and going to Nintendo or Sony; and there's a decent list of mismanagement of outside developers as well.

Yasuhara has no more tears left for this franchise? 

Maybe OzCrash? Or, we could wait for ST to implode...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really to me, part of the problem is perhaps corporate needs vs. creative needs vs. market demand vs. resources. To me there is no doubt that something is out of balance here and that we see the results regularly. Even with Mania we know there were time constraint problems but the team for that was fortunate enough to get not only some helpful delays to finish it up properly, but also a chance to revisit it and address certain concerns with Plus. This is definitely not the norm with SEGA and Sonic Team though and it is why i wonder what Iizuka's personal stance on his relationship with SEGA is. I remember reading somewhere when he was put in charge that he said he would create a single unified brand image for Sonic and that obviously never happened. The question is why. Naka we know frequently had disagreements with SEGA management and it eventually led to his departure. Considering Iizuka has said he'd like to still be working on Sonic 20 years from now I wonder if he just puts up with SEGA because he actually does have the passion and drive to work on Sonic and doesn't see a better alternative.

  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Promotion 1
  • Fist Bump 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Sonic Fan J said:

Really to me, part of the problem is perhaps corporate needs vs. creative needs vs. market demand vs. resources. To me there is no doubt that something is out of balance here and that we see the results regularly. Even with Mania we know there were time constraint problems but the team for that was fortunate enough to get not only some helpful delays to finish it up properly, but also a chance to revisit it and address certain concerns with Plus. This is definitely not the norm with SEGA and Sonic Team though and it is why i wonder what Iizuka's personal stance on his relationship with SEGA is. I remember reading somewhere when he was put in charge that he said he would create a single unified brand image for Sonic and that obviously never happened. The question is why. Naka we know frequently had disagreements with SEGA management and it eventually led to his departure. Considering Iizuka has said he'd like to still be working on Sonic 20 years from now I wonder if he just puts up with SEGA because he actually does have the passion and drive to work on Sonic and doesn't see a better alternative. 

Yeah, he's the director of SA1, SA2, Heroes introduced the Chao, introduced the Chaotix version we love, wanted hub worlds...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Marco9966 said:

Yeah, he's the director of SA1, SA2, Heroes introduced the Chao, introduced the Chaotix version we love, wanted hub worlds...

It is weird what he puts out today compared to when he wasn't in charge and brings questions of what happened. Did he have a change in vision or did someone higher up have a different idea? The fact that he was surprised at how well Sonic Mania sold to their target demographic (grade schoolers) also shows that there might be some confusion of what makes the series appeal to all ages.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Mad Convoy said:

I'm not handwaving it, I'm more or less saying that something probably happened that changed circumstances in a way that changed Sonic Team's timeline and priorities. They started off thinking they had plenty of time to work on making the engine beautiful, but were suddenly hit with a new deadline that forced them to drop the engine work and get going on the game itself. Its not some false dichotomy of they did nothing for three years or they did a lot of things. They can start the long process of making an engine for three years (so they weren't doing nothing), and they can also hit problems and unexpected happenings along the way that makes a lot of their work invisible or a moot point.

I never said that Sonic Team itself was the one that made the decision-- its possible Sega imposed it on them, whether to have something out soon to quell complaints about the time void or to have something out to coincide with Mania. Its supported in the game too-- not every rushed game has critical absent chunks of material, sometimes its seemingly subtle things like hidden section of a level that couldn't be fixed in time or characters in cutscenes that are blatantly being set up as boss fights but are never actually fought. These aren't just rumor and speculation-- they're in the game.

You may not believe it concrete, but it is there and I do think it worth examining or at least respecting.

That's all well and good, but your original response to my original point (that we already saw Sonic Team "take a break" from the series and return to the mainstream with a new major Sonic release in Forces) wasn't mentioning the rumors about Forces' development as something to take into consideration as to why Forces turned out as it did despite the break. You called semantics about the game's "actual" development period and correlated Forces' defined four years of production (reported by Iizuka himself) to that of Boom: Rise of Lyric's respective three years of development, as if to directly imply something went colossally wrong with Forces' production on a similar level with that game.

My preceding posts about Forces' development are about referencing the facts on the game that we know, straight from the developers' mouths. Whatever mishaps that may have happened during the game's production may be true, but they don't have much to do with my original argument.

6 hours ago, Mad Convoy said:

I was never specifically holding the fans accountable for Sega and Sonic Team's fuck-ups, in fact I even say this (bolding mine):

Its nothing like what you said, I have no motivation to blame the fans, its lost on me too. And have said on several occasions that company fuckups aren't the consumer's fault and that mentality is oftentimes a poor excuse for bad behavior. As I was hoping would be clear but was evidently lost, I'm not saying the fans are to blame for thinking that way. It does, on the surface, have the look of a big Sonic title, but notice that it mostly appears in marketing, much of which was outright cancelled. Nothing in the actual game indicates such, and its not like the series lacks precedent for this-- remember Sonic 4's marketing in America? But false hype is a real thing, and it creates more disappointment than anybody really needs or the game merits.

Again, maybe it is rumor and speculation, but until we know exactly what went down, that's all anybody's guess is. Most I ask for is for people to entertain more than black and white viewpoints on opinions. There's no dichotomies here. I disagree with you, but that doesn't automatically mean I believe the exact opposite as you in every way and must be dismissed and spoken to accordingly. I especially do not appreciate baseless accusations about my blaming the fans, which are very clearly untrue and evidence of the black and white thinking I was speaking of earlier.

Because you seem pretty convinced that I'm the one speaking in dishonest terms here and I'm not making any compromises, I'd like to thus know what exactly am I missing here with the following statements you said in your original reply (and for clarity's sake, I'm quoting the full response and highlighting the points you established):

"And if I recall correctly, it was the fans who put the expectation that Forces as major revival game, not Sega and Sonic Team. And what were they going to say, "No guys, don't buy this, its not what you're anticipating it to be"? Ultimately, it was the fans who wanted Forces to be some kind of massive comeback-- for which I pass no negative judgement on the fans for, but which I point out does not necessarily mean Sega and Sonic Team had the same desires or intent in making the game."

How are these comments not pushing the idea that the expectations for Forces being an important release aren't on Sega/Sonic Team's shoulders, and are instead on the shoulders of the fanbase? What exactly is vague or unclear about these replies that I'm somehow not registering? What exactly are you trying to say here?

That Sega and Sonic Team intended for Forces to be a spinoff or a smaller project that wasn't supposed to receive major publicity? That the fans apparently have more input than Sega and Sonic Team over the promotion of the games the latter two produce and sell to the market?

Are these black-and-white analyses of your quotes? Sure, but I don't see how the quotes themselves aren't.

  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Space☆Yeow said:

That's all well and good, but your original response to my original point (that we already saw Sonic Team "take a break" from the series and return to the mainstream with a new major Sonic release in Forces) wasn't mentioning the rumors about Forces' development as something to take into consideration as to why Forces turned out as it did despite the break. You called semantics about the game's "actual" development period and correlated Forces' defined four years of production (reported by Iizuka himself) to that of Boom: Rise of Lyric's respective three years of development, as if to directly imply something went colossally wrong with Forces' production on a similar level with that game.

My preceding posts about Forces' development are about referencing the facts on the game that we know, straight from the developers' mouths. Whatever mishaps that may have happened during the game's production may be true, but they don't have much to do with my original argument.

The problem is that I'm not actually arguing that we already saw Sonic Team take a break. I'm saying that Sonic Team has gone through so many changes that may well be large enough to quantify a total replacement. There's no break about it-- the guys being replaced are not likely coming back.

I mean, this isn't even the first time this has happened-- the Sonic Team of now has more different faces than not than the Sonic Team of 2011, and all different faces from the Sonic Team of 2005. Which addresses your point that Sonic Team has needed a new franchise manager for 10 years-- because in likelihood, the role has been gutted and refilled many times over the past ten years.

Its not semantics, its the reality of game development. Time and effort are good but only get you so far, and well, I don't think its entirely unfair to think that something is wrong here if the engine was worked on the longest. That I got a different conclusion from that than you is okay, just as it is okay for you to come to a different conclusion to me, but until we know whose call the deadlines were, most we can do is speculate.

1 hour ago, Space☆Yeow said:

Because you seem pretty convinced that I'm the one speaking in dishonest terms here

Woah, woah, woah, one phrase in and you're already assuming things about me that don't hold up. I don't believe at all that you are speaking in dishonest terms and I honestly don't even know where that came from. I believe your arguments are weak and rooted in logical fallacy, but that isn't anywhere near meaning I think you're being deliberately dishonest or not acting in good faith here. Logical fallacies happen all the time, its a part of being human, and they don't even necessarily destroy an argument-- used correctly and sparingly, they're actually good tools to engage your audience to listen to your arguments. But they fall apart rapidly if made, even by accident, the crux of your argument, which I interpreted it to be despite some of your efforts to cite sources.

1 hour ago, Space☆Yeow said:

I'm not making any compromises

Yet again, lines like this aren't exactly helping your point here. It seems like you've gone into this discussion with a pre set idea that I have to be wrong no matter what, because otherwise that would consistitute a compromise. However, I refuse to assume such automatically. I'm not assuming the worst intent from you. Miswording happens, after all, and that's okay.

Dude, you're like the opposite of a malicious person. You very clearly don't have any sinister motives here. I know this, but keep this in mind for future discussion where you claim that you won't make compromises-- because people who don't know you well enough will probably take it as saying that you won't even entertain or accept their ideas, and so will only get the notion that you're completely unreasonable out of the whole debate. Which isn't true! Lines like what I quote really sell yourself short, and you don't deserve that, because you are a reasonable person and that should be clear to other people.

1 hour ago, Space☆Yeow said:

"And if I recall correctly, it was the fans who put the expectation that Forces as major revival game, not Sega and Sonic Team. And what were they going to say, "No guys, don't buy this, its not what you're anticipating it to be"? Ultimately, it was the fans who wanted Forces to be some kind of massive comeback-- for which I pass no negative judgement on the fans for, but which I point out does not necessarily mean Sega and Sonic Team had the same desires or intent in making the game."

How are these comments not pushing the idea that the expectations for Forces being an important release aren't on Sega/Sonic Team's shoulders, and are instead on the shoulders of the fanbase? What exactly is vague or unclear about these replies that I'm somehow not registering? What exactly are you trying to say here?

That Sega and Sonic Team intended for Forces to be a spinoff or a smaller project that wasn't supposed to receive major publicity? That the fans apparently have more input than Sega and Sonic Team over the promotion of the games the latter two produce and sell to the market?

Are these black-and-white analyses of your quotes? Sure, but I don't see how the quotes themselves aren't.

What I am trying to say here is that expectations were overblown by the fans, but this was in part because of the information Sega and Sonic Team gave out. The fans are not responsible for Sega and Sonic Team messing up, but at the same time they are more than capable of making mistakes in their own right that are understandably awkward for companies to use their extra information to debunk. That does not mean that saying nothing on the matter was a good call from Sega and Sonic Team-- it was after all the information they released to begin with that started the issue. Hence why I don't pass any negative judgement on the fans for overhyping the game, but point out that it is possible that Sonic Team and Sega did not have the intent that the fans assumed they did from the initial information. Badly-executed or poorly conceived marketing isn't the fans fault, but it sure can contribute to stuff like overhyping.

I am not attempting assert what Sega and Sonic Team's intent were in doing so, but I am saying what my speculation is on the matter. You don't have to agree with me, but I do hope you leave this conversation with at least some open-mindedness for different possibilities. If nothing else, I want to be respected and understood in the same way that I make efforts to respect and understand others.

I worded the section you quote awkwardly, and I take full responsibility for that. Remember kids, don't write detailed arguments too close to bedtime like Convoy here. However, I hope the above paragraph has provided clarity on the issue.

In general, what I want out of this discussion is the same as I want from any discussion-- the opportunity to learn from and share ideas with people who think different than me. Even if nobody leaves with a changed opinion, I hope to still be left with a better understanding of other people's perspectives and ways of thinking. If anything, I actually prefer discussions with people I disagree with-- its more entertaining and vibrant that way, and I ultimately tend to learn more from the whole experience.

I really hope this has cleared up any confusion you may have had about me assuming ill intent about you or your arguing style. 

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sonic Team is really the best developers for Sonic there responsible for games like Sonic Heroes, Sonic Riders, and Sonic Forces all good games. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Fire-N-Space said:

Sonic Team is really the best developers for Sonic there responsible for games like Sonic Heroes, Sonic Riders, and Sonic Forces all good games. 

But Heroes and Riders were good

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Define "Better"? 

Part of what makes Sonic so good is how accessible he is, being owned by a third party company, he's not tied to any super hardcore rules. Now while that can be a bad thing, I think for now Sonic is best left with Sonic Team. If we sell him to Nintendo, sure we'll get good games more consistently, probably, but that comes at the cost of Sonic's accessibility. We'd never see anything like the Sonic Generations PC port ever again, nor amazing mods like the Unleashed Project.

Sure, we can swap out Sonic Team for  new fresh developers, but that's not guaranteed to work. Almost every single Sonic game has radically different credits and we're all well aware what a roller coaster of quality this franchise has been. 

  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Promotion 1
  • Chuckle 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/3/2018 at 8:13 PM, Marco9966 said:

Yes.

Who?

Him:

 

That's great, it's coming out very well!
There is no way to play it as far as I know, but from what I have seen in the video it seems to be very accurate and polished.

My only complain is the walljump, Sonic is about keeping the pace, the walljump slows down the pace to a stop, I think it doesn't fit at all... maybe after you stick to a wall, instead of stopping, just run on the wall, so you can still jump but you can also keep the momentum and run (similar to the parkour system but physics based instead of scripted).

I wouldn't mind an official Sonic game based on this engine, it looks far better than Utopia too.

It's only missing a decent camera system (it seems the camera is still controlled by the mouse analog sticks or some buttons, I may be wrong on this).

17 hours ago, Miragnarok said:

Maybe OzCrash?

Please not... I played Sonic World, the chao gardden is cool, I like all the characters and all, but the fangame is very unprofessional and unfinished... there is no direction, no goal, stuff continues being added and the game expands, but everything is pointless, the gameplay is still heavily lacking and the effort goes into adding more characters and stages instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Mad Convoy said:

Woah, woah, woah, one phrase in and you're already assuming things about me that don't hold up. I don't believe at all that you are speaking in dishonest terms and I honestly don't even know where that came from. I believe your arguments are weak and rooted in logical fallacy, but that isn't anywhere near meaning I think you're being deliberately dishonest or not acting in good faith here. Logical fallacies happen all the time, its a part of being human, and they don't even necessarily destroy an argument-- used correctly and sparingly, they're actually good tools to engage your audience to listen to your arguments. But they fall apart rapidly if made, even by accident, the crux of your argument, which I interpreted it to be despite some of your efforts to cite sources.

...

Yet again, lines like this aren't exactly helping your point here. It seems like you've gone into this discussion with a pre set idea that I have to be wrong no matter what, because otherwise that would consistitute a compromise. However, I refuse to assume such automatically. I'm not assuming the worst intent from you. Miswording happens, after all, and that's okay.

Dude, you're like the opposite of a malicious person. You very clearly don't have any sinister motives here. I know this, but keep this in mind for future discussion where you claim that you won't make compromises-- because people who don't know you well enough will probably take it as saying that you won't even entertain or accept their ideas, and so will only get the notion that you're completely unreasonable out of the whole debate. Which isn't true! Lines like what I quote really sell yourself short, and you don't deserve that, because you are a reasonable person and that should be clear to other people.

...

In general, what I want out of this discussion is the same as I want from any discussion-- the opportunity to learn from and share ideas with people who think different than me. Even if nobody leaves with a changed opinion, I hope to still be left with a better understanding of other people's perspectives and ways of thinking. If anything, I actually prefer discussions with people I disagree with-- its more entertaining and vibrant that way, and I ultimately tend to learn more from the whole experience.

I really hope this has cleared up any confusion you may have had about me assuming ill intent about you or your arguing style. 

Mm, fair enough. I can admit there are certain arguments about the state of the series I don't have much patience for due to being slapped across the face with them so many times. Apologies for any harm done.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Space☆Yeow said:

Mm, fair enough. I can admit there are certain arguments about the state of the series I don't have much patience for due to being slapped across the face with them so many times. Apologies for any harm done.

Ah, I can totally sympathize. (And I do actually agree that blaming the fans for the company's actions is bad form. Just that I hate it when fans use a company's bad decisions to excuse fans' mistakes or bad behavior too. It assigns fans' self control and decision making to the company's whims, which isn't good and easily exploitable by companies that aren't as dumb as Sega, plus its just plain obnoxious. I have little patience for that argument as a result, so I hope it hasn't affected my statements here in this topic too badly.)

No harm done! If anything, thanks for saying what was actually bothering you about my arguments so I could properly address them-- I don't deliberately set out to do things wrong so its good for me to get a nudge if I've worded something poorly or are going too far. :)
----

As for the topic at hand... Yeah, its complicated. Its not just a matter of throwing out everybody = good stuff in the future.

People often cite Mania as an example that the fans do Sonic better, but overlook the fact that Sonic Team was critical to Mania being the way it is today and did a lot of work to help Headcannon out. For example, Mania was pitched as a Steam port of the TaxStealth remakes of Sonic 1 and 2 with some bonus original levels-- think like a modern day, don't-have-all-the-needed-rights-for-Sonic-3 Sonic Jam. It was Iizuka that suggested what we know today as Mania-- a fully original tribute to the Classic Era on PC and consoles with some zones being remixes of classic zones and some zones being totally original. It would be a good idea to revisit that port idea sometime imo, it'd be good to have the TaxStealth remade Classic Sonic on PC, but in 2017? A game like what Iizuka suggested is just what the doctor ordered, and proof that Sonic Team leadership is capable of making good judgement calls.

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.