Why do critics always pan Sonic storylines but give Mario a free pass?

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

15 hours ago, Badnik Zero said:

Maybe what I’m trying to say is this. Why should anyone care about story in a Sonic game? Why would a reviewer care. No one who picks the games up to review is invested in the character of Sonic. The original draw of the games is its style. It’s speed, its art, its colors and music.

The same reason they would care about any other story? Because they can be fun, entertaining, insightful, and yes even dark and gripping. None of that runs counter to it style.

You ever noticed that whenever a Sonic story doesn’t do that well, people rag on it regardless of what side of the spectrum it’s on?

Lost Worlds didn’t take itself anywhere near the level ShTH, but it being lighthearted still didn’t protect it from any criticism either.

[Perkilator]

Probably gonna derail the topic, but if you want a story-based Nintendo game, here's some examples:

Zelda

Fire Emblem

Xenoblade

[thumbs13]

1 hour ago, Badnik Zero said:

I get that the epic story has been a part of Sonic for a while (I’d even argue that it goes back to how atmospheric the last stages of the later classic games were in terms of epic), but past Sonic Adventure 2, that never really caught on. After a series jumps the shark, its critics can be pretty harsh. Reviewers have been done with epic stories in Sonic since Shadow’s game failed hard on the epic mark. What fans want is another deal, but reviewers don’t care about that kind of story.

Then reviewers need to get with the times. This falls under the "Sonic's shitty friends" problem, where if it wasn't in the classics, it shouldn't exist no matter how many fans say otherwise.

[Dr. Detective]

Light or dark isn't the problem. I honestly feel like what most people want is just something that feels like an adventure again. Or, at least, that's what I want.

Adventures are fun but they have their ups and downs. There's hardship and turmoil but also jokes and silliness. The happy times make the sad times sadder. The sad times make the happy times happier. Something that takes full advantage of the world and the amount of characters they have would go a long way towards helping things out too. Also, taking advantage of the character's quirks and even sometimes experimenting with situations they may not have been in before goes a long way as well.

There exist things that elicit satisfaction from me in terms of this. Those cartoons they release on their Youtube channel are full of character and utilize everyone in ways that are charming. The IDW comics have been taking advantage of the flip side to that, using horror movie tropes and a more serious situation to draw upon the other side of the characters in an effective way that isn't usually explored. Getting to see the Chaotix react to a more serious situation in the comics and seeing Shadow being used for fun gags in the TSR cartoon did well to prove that certain characters are flexible enough to handle both comedy and drama when need be. 

You don't need to be deep to be interesting or fun. It usually just takes a step further than being "We've got a generic bad guy who wants to do the generic bad guy thing and you've gotta stop him". That's usually the baseline and everything surrounding that is where all the intrigue should come in. The tone is important, sure, but it's not the thing I'm the most concerned about as far as storytelling. 

Honestly, at the top of the list, I'm mostly just hoping things aren't mundane and boring. 

[Rosaleia]

On 7/2/2019 at 2:20 PM, Eurisko said:

That was a whopping reply I was pointing out that I feel that simple light-hearted storylines with a splash of comedy work better not just for Sonic but for the whole cast of characters. The over serious plots and acting don't. 

Lets face it, no matter what the current social trends are the fact remains that this is a series about a fast , anthropomorphic blue hedgehog and his friends  trying to stop a crazy fat man with a megalomaniacal complex from taking over a world. It doesn't need to be complex, it never has and I think Sega have started to realise that. 

Yes , he was the "Cooler" alternate to Mario AND many other video game characters of the early 90's but as someone who grew up at that time , it wasn't the "dude with a tude" schtick that made him, it was his games. Simple and to the point.  

This is why Mania was so highly received. you don't need the overly complex storytelling for Sonic. Just great games.

Welcome to the boards by the way 

 

Thank you! To elaborate though, I wasn't trying to say Sonic shouldn't have light hearted moments. Ultimately, the series did its best when the creators were able to balance the more light-hearted and more serious tones of the series, and got the most criticism when it ried too hard to swing towards an extreme towards either direction. Basically? People want things they can take seriously enough without it feeling too pretentious.

Also, I'd argue Sonic's image and the portrayal of the series is a lot more important than you think. Platforming isn't as popular anymore. Trying to rely heavily/exclusively on an unpopular genre, for the amount of money they charge upfront aren't going to help the franchise survive. They want to market to kids, but SEGA doesn't have a viable market plan to reel them in on Sonic's standard gameplay alone. Kids post recession aren't going to blow $50-$60 for a 20 hr game, when they have cheaper Steam options, micro-transactions, or AAA games they can choose from.

YES Sonic Mania sold well, but that was because it didn't sell for nearly as much as a standard title. It was a classic 2D game, half the levels were extensions of older levels, and that meant costs to produce the game were a lot lower than an average Sonic game; allowing them to sell it at a low price. A standard Sonic game isn't going to thrive on those tactics. Sonic can't AFFORD to rely soley on platforming gameplay. He's not even part of a popular genre anymore. And to make matters worse, his games keep flopping. To survive, Sonic needs to reach out and utilize what other avenues of entertainment can keep him relevant, but are also feasible for him.

But what about Mario, you ask? PARENTS introduced their kids to Mario. He is the mascot of a viable console company, has different IPs to keep the console brand going, and unlike SEGA, Nintendo thought ahead, and pre-emptively placed Mario in different genres of gameplay outside of the standard platformer so that he could remain relevant even in the potential event platforming failed. And the kicker? Some of Mario's other genres sold better than the actual platformers he was based on.

Meanwhile, SEGA alienated their fans which reduced their capacity to sell to the newer generation. Those SatAM fans who left years ago? They matter. The adventure fans who left because they disliked the direction of the series? They matter. Because when they grew up, would have been the ones who introduced to the future generations the franchise. SEGA should have tried harder to integrate these fans as opposed to completely disregarding  them for 'their vision', which never sold well in the first place.

If anything, I think the over-emphasis on gameplay is actually hurting Sonic, because its making him too defined by a genre that doesn't sell, and its creating characters, who don't have long term direction for remaining relevant in the series beyond 1-2 games.

[Eurisko]

On ‎7‎/‎4‎/‎2019 at 3:08 AM, Rosaleia said:

 

Thank you! To elaborate though, I wasn't trying to say Sonic shouldn't have light hearted moments. Ultimately, the series did its best when the creators were able to balance the more light-hearted and more serious tones of the series, and got the most criticism when it ried too hard to swing towards an extreme towards either direction. Basically? People want things they can take seriously enough without it feeling too pretentious.

Also, I'd argue Sonic's image and the portrayal of the series is a lot more important than you think. Platforming isn't as popular anymore. Trying to rely heavily/exclusively on an unpopular genre, for the amount of money they charge upfront aren't going to help the franchise survive. They want to market to kids, but SEGA doesn't have a viable market plan to reel them in on Sonic's standard gameplay alone. Kids post recession aren't going to blow $50-$60 for a 20 hr game, when they have cheaper Steam options, micro-transactions, or AAA games they can choose from.

YES Sonic Mania sold well, but that was because it didn't sell for nearly as much as a standard title. It was a classic 2D game, half the levels were extensions of older levels, and that meant costs to produce the game were a lot lower than an average Sonic game; allowing them to sell it at a low price. A standard Sonic game isn't going to thrive on those tactics. Sonic can't AFFORD to rely soley on platforming gameplay. He's not even part of a popular genre anymore. And to make matters worse, his games keep flopping. To survive, Sonic needs to reach out and utilize what other avenues of entertainment can keep him relevant, but are also feasible for him.

But what about Mario, you ask? PARENTS introduced their kids to Mario. He is the mascot of a viable console company, has different IPs to keep the console brand going, and unlike SEGA, Nintendo thought ahead, and pre-emptively placed Mario in different genres of gameplay outside of the standard platformer so that he could remain relevant even in the potential event platforming failed. And the kicker? Some of Mario's other genres sold better than the actual platformers he was based on.

Meanwhile, SEGA alienated their fans which reduced their capacity to sell to the newer generation. Those SatAM fans who left years ago? They matter. The adventure fans who left because they disliked the direction of the series? They matter. Because when they grew up, would have been the ones who introduced to the future generations the franchise. SEGA should have tried harder to integrate these fans as opposed to completely disregarding  them for 'their vision', which never sold well in the first place.

If anything, I think the over-emphasis on gameplay is actually hurting Sonic, because its making him too defined by a genre that doesn't sell, and its creating characters, who don't have long term direction for remaining relevant in the series beyond 1-2 games.

Yes I agree that when they lean heavily one way or another is when the fans complain of the storytelling the most for Sonic , we are probably the hardest fans to please in the world

I do disagree with that platforming isn't as popular to an extent , Many many modern games have and are reliant on platforming elements. DOOM , Tomb Raider and even fortnite and Apex Legends just to name a few rely heavily on platforming and precise jumping. And there's the revival of Crash , Spyro and the indie wave of platformers like Shovel Knight and Ori.

Sonic games have not charged full price for a while now , Mania , Forces and TSR were all under the full price range on release at least in the UK anyway. Sonic Mania sold well not because of price , it sold because it was a classic sonic game done in the right way that fans had been clamouring for for YEARS. Yes there were a ton of levels that were re-imaginings of older levels  but it was a breath of fresh air for the series and it worked.

I introduced my kids to Mario AND Sonic and they love them both. They like some Mario games and they like some Sonic games - its personal preference , they'd play Transformed over Mario Kart 8 any day but they don't like Sonic Generations over Mario Bros Wii. Sonic has also had games of a different genre sell better than his core games but that's also true for many other IP's that branch out into differing types of games not just Mario and Sonic.

Any fandom where it be video games or TV and movie franchises will always have its hardcore fans that will stay with it forever no matter what gets churned out, and yes you're right, there's those fans that will fall away at some point and go on to other things, that's always been the case.

Don't get me wrong I see what you're saying , but what you are saying rings true for many games and franchises not just Sonic.

 

[ComeAsYouAre]

We have gotten to the point that where stuff like MLP and the New Ducktales cartoon take themselves more seriously than Modern Sonic games , yet we don't see all these critics go insane about it like they do every time Sonic's tone isn't exactly like the teletubbies

 

It honestly comes off as boring out of touch  30's years olds who think that children can't handle anything too dark

[Rosaleia]

6 hours ago, Eurisko said:

Yes I agree that when they lean heavily one way or another is when the fans complain of the storytelling the most for Sonic , we are probably the hardest fans to please in the world

I do disagree with that platforming isn't as popular to an extent , Many many modern games have and are reliant on platforming elements. DOOM , Tomb Raider and even fortnite and Apex Legends just to name a few rely heavily on platforming and precise jumping. And there's the revival of Crash , Spyro and the indie wave of platformers like Shovel Knight and Ori.

Sonic games have not charged full price for a while now , Mania , Forces and TSR were all under the full price range on release at least in the UK anyway. Sonic Mania sold well not because of price , it sold because it was a classic sonic game done in the right way that fans had been clamouring for for YEARS. Yes there were a ton of levels that were re-imaginings of older levels  but it was a breath of fresh air for the series and it worked.

I introduced my kids to Mario AND Sonic and they love them both. They like some Mario games and they like some Sonic games - its personal preference , they'd play Transformed over Mario Kart 8 any day but they don't like Sonic Generations over Mario Bros Wii. Sonic has also had games of a different genre sell better than his core games but that's also true for many other IP's that branch out into differing types of games not just Mario and Sonic.

Any fandom where it be video games or TV and movie franchises will always have its hardcore fans that will stay with it forever no matter what gets churned out, and yes you're right, there's those fans that will fall away at some point and go on to other things, that's always been the case.

Don't get me wrong I see what you're saying , but what you are saying rings true for many games and franchises not just Sonic.

 

Find me a classic platformer outside of legacy titles that can sell for AAA prices that was created in the past few years. Most of the examples you gave me:

1) Are legacy titles. Tomb Raider, Spyro, DOOM, and many of the titles you listed all have loyal, older fans from earlier years they can rely on who are willing to buy and promote their games. Sonic doesn't have that. After awhile, a lot of his fans leave because SEGA alienates them.

2) These games incorporate elements of traditional platforming but are not heavily reliant on the genre

3) Are low price/ free to play and rely more on micro-transations.

Classic platforming the way Mario and Sonic were on its own, generally don't sell as well. At least, not for the prices that used to be demanded. And even with Mario, Nintendo has been progressively attempting to experiment more with open world elements like with titles like Mario Odyssey. Meanwhile Sonic sells at around $40, ten dollars less than he did in the 90s-2000s and people STILL don't want to buy his games. As for Mania, It was likely a combination of both the price and it being hailed as a good Sonic game. The low price made it so that there wasn't as much of a risk involved for people who wanted to give the game a chance, but didnt want to feel like they wasted their money if it tanked.

... But, if I'm being perfectly honest? 1 million in global copies sold... isn't that great. At least for Sonic. Sure, its better than the more recent titles, and was a step in the right direction. But when thats all you can get globally on multiple ports, when games like SA2 could sell at least 1 million per console? Thats very telling of both people's expectations for gaming nowadays, and how badly SEGA's sank Sonic's reputation. Because, I agree with you, Sonic Mania wasn't a bad game. However these sales strongly suggest that because of Sonic's association with terrible games, Mania didn't sell as well as it could have. Let that sink in for a moment.  Even in the face of a better game, EVEN in spite of its good reviews, a lot of people don't want to buy it. That can only mean one thing: That, people are afraid to re-invest in this franchise. They're afraid to get attached to it, only for it to spiral down again the way Forces did.

Which brings me back to my initial point. If Sonic wants to survive, he's going to have to work extra hard to win people's trust back. And that means you can't rely on just the classic gameplay. Mania already proved that, while somewhat helpful, its not not going to save the franchise. Storyline IS important, when your a franchise with Sonic's reputation, and you need to utilize whatever you can to attract people you've lost, or are reluctant to even touch your games.

And like I said, and as you've demonstrated, the previous generations DO matter. Because its not even just a matter of them prospectively introducing their kids to the franchise, they're also a lot of the ones currently telling their families and loved ones NOT to buy Sonic games out of the personal experiences they had with the franchise. So it goes both ways. And this, is also a problem that Sonic has which Mario doesn't. Mario never had such a diverse fanbase that has yet to reconcile with both the company and one another's poor decisions and treatment of one another.

[Badnik Zero]

15 minutes ago, Rosaleia said:

But, if I'm being perfectly honest? 1 million in global copies sold... isn't that great. At least for Sonic. Sure, its better than the more recent titles, and was a step in the right direction. But when thats all you can get globally on multiple ports, when games like SA2 could sell at least 1 million per console? Thats very telling of both people's expectations for gaming nowadays, and how badly SEGA's sank Sonic's reputation. Because, I agree with you, Sonic Mania wasn't a bad game. However these sales strongly suggest that because of Sonic's association with terrible games, Mania didn't sell as well as it could have. Let that sink in for a moment. 

Just to support this excellent point here, classic fans were already burned on the promise of new classics by Sonic 4, just a few years earlier.

[DabigRG]

51 minutes ago, ComeAsYouAre said:

We have gotten to the point that where stuff like MLP and the New Ducktales cartoon take themselves more seriously than Modern Sonic games , yet we don't see all these critics go insane about it like they do every time Sonic's tone isn't exactly like the teletubbies

 

It honestly comes off as boring out of touch  30's years olds who think that children can't handle anything too dark

That's probably because they are distinct updates of classic TV properties rather than an ongoing game series that keeps on runnin. 

Also, Nega Wisps, the Deadly Six, Eggman's Extractor, and formerly Infinite exist.

[Multikaris]

4 minutes ago, DabigRG said:

That's probably because they are distinct updates of classic TV properties rather than an ongoing game series that keeps on runnin. 

Also, Nega Wisps, the Deadly Six, Eggman's Extractor, and formerly Infinite exist.

Well, the Deadly Six were this in their first appearance, but they’ve been watered down. This is the problem. Any “dark” elements are watered down or outright ignored in later games nowadays (and are typically nothing compared to the past dark elements, too). Mario does that for its RPGs, where the dark elements are ignored for all the other games.

[BaronGrackle]

55 minutes ago, ComeAsYouAre said:

We have gotten to the point that where stuff like MLP and the New Ducktales cartoon take themselves more seriously than Modern Sonic games , yet we don't see all these critics go insane about it like they do every time Sonic's tone isn't exactly like the teletubbies

 

It honestly comes off as boring out of touch  30's years olds who think that children can't handle anything too dark

The new Ducktales cartoon is done well, but it's not particularly dark. Most of it is lighthearted danger, pretty much on par with Sonic Unleashed or Sonic Colors.

Where it beats Sonic stories is through its CHARACTERIZATION. And we've all known that Sonic's world would benefit from stronger character development.

[DabigRG]

Just now, Miragnarok said:

Well, the Deadly Six were this in their first appearance, but they’ve been watered down. This is the problem. Any “dark” elements are watered down or outright ignored in later games nowadays (and are typically nothing compared to the past dark elements, too). 

You know what, fair enough. Zavok is the one that's been showing up and he hasn't really shown much cruelty outside of certain in-game lines in TSR.

1 minute ago, Miragnarok said:

 Mario does that for its RPGs, where the dark elements are ignored for all the other games.

Mm...idk, I thinking about Galaxy 1 and questioning where that falls.

But then again, Mario doesn't do too much carryover anyway..

3 minutes ago, BaronGrackle said:

The new Ducktales cartoon is done well, but it's not particularly dark. Most of it is lighthearted danger, pretty much on par with Sonic Unleashed or Sonic Colors.

Where it beats Sonic stories is through its CHARACTERIZATION. And we've all known that Sonic's world would benefit from stronger character development.

Again, TV Show vs Game series.

[Rosaleia]

1 hour ago, ComeAsYouAre said:

We have gotten to the point that where stuff like MLP and the New Ducktales cartoon take themselves more seriously than Modern Sonic games , yet we don't see all these critics go insane about it like they do every time Sonic's tone isn't exactly like the teletubbies

 

It honestly comes off as boring out of touch  30's years olds who think that children can't handle anything too dark

 

I think people have more of a problem with the fact its pretentious. SEGA doesn't know how to keep a proper balance in tone. Take Jak 2 for example. It was darker, but still managed to maintain a lot of the comedic, light-hearted moments that made it what it was. It never completely tried to change its identity. With SEGA, they're always trying to go to from one extreme like Shadow the Hedgehog, to Colors and Lost World which stories feel like wannabe Mario games. It also doesnt help that they're utterly lazy when it comes to basic continuity. Sonic's being written by people who don't know much about the franchise or care, and it shows.

[DabigRG]

22 minutes ago, Rosaleia said:

 

I think people have more of a problem with the fact its pretentious. SEGA doesn't know how to keep a proper balance in tone. Take Jak 2 for example. It was darker, but still managed to maintain a lot of the comedic, light-hearted moments that made it what it was. It never completely tried to change its identity. With SEGA, they're always trying to go to from one extreme like Shadow the Hedgehog, to Colors and Lost World which stories feel like wannabe Mario games. It also doesnt help that they're utterly lazy when it comes to basic continuity. Sonic's being written by people who don't know much about the franchise or care, and it shows.

Lost World was more of a Mario-esque gameply environment than anything. Colors on the otherhand was essentially AoStH in Space.

 

[Tracker_TD]

So much talk about sales and like... I'm not a SEGA shareholder. I couldn't give a shit if Mania sold 10 million copies or 10,000 copies. It's really damn good. That's what matters to me. And apparently SEGA get that too, because despite Forces and Mania both apparently doing "well", they sure did carry on promoting Mania a lot more, because they knew full well people gave a shit about good games.

Okami sold like ass, but I don't see people hold that against it. Breaking quality down to sales, pointing to sales as a need for change, is annoyingly reductive. Point to bad games as a need for change, not sales.

[Rosaleia]

37 minutes ago, Tracker_TD said:

So much talk about sales and like... I'm not a SEGA shareholder. I couldn't give a shit if Mania sold 10 million copies or 10,000 copies. It's really damn good. That's what matters to me. And apparently SEGA get that too, because despite Forces and Mania both apparently doing "well", they sure did carry on promoting Mania a lot more, because they knew full well people gave a shit about good games.

Okami sold like ass, but I don't see people hold that against it. Breaking quality down to sales, pointing to sales as a need for change, is annoyingly reductive. Point to bad games as a need for change, not sales.

 

I agree its a good game, but its useless if SEGA can't be consistent in their quality. People will just go back to boycotting Sonic games.

Also, I never said Mania was a bad game because of how well or poor it sold. In fact, I even as went as far as to say I personally thought it was good and that it even had good reviews. But when you compare it to how Sonic used to do --- Not even compared to the genesis era but late 90s-early 2000s, 1 million global sales is still not good. It reflects that Sonic's in a very bad state financially, and, that while it may not be reflective of the games like Mania's quality, the extreme lack of trust between consumers and SEGA. How people are so scared to touch Sonic, they'll overlook a good game like Mania because they don't want to risk wasting money or getting attached to this franchise anymore. Thats something far too dangerous for a company to ignore. When even your good games hurt in sales because of how poorly the brand is associated.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Not to mention, poor sales leads to less of what folks love, regardless of how good it is.

Okami was a good game that sold like ass. Any wonder why we barely got a single new game beyond the 3DS Okamiden, and the studio behind it closing down? That’s partly why.

There’s likely more to it that I’m not fully aware of (advertising, competition, etc), but that’s the crux of it at the end of the day. Could also explain why Sonic Team changed their tune with by making Sonic Unleashed’s boost centric gameplay, then stuck to it for the next decade with little improvements when it was working well enough for them.

[Tracker_TD]

1 hour ago, Rosaleia said:

I agree its a good game, but its useless if SEGA can't be consistent in their quality. People will just go back to boycotting Sonic games.

Then why can't I worry about that if Mania 2 sucks? We're not there yet. 

1 hour ago, Rosaleia said:

Thats something far too dangerous for a company to ignore. When even your good games hurt in sales because of how poorly the brand is associated.

I mean, yeah it sucks - but I don't think selling out to a melting pot of niches is going to fix that. It can cater to all these other factions of Sonic fans, and even if that were to boost sales, it doesn't mean the quality is going to go up. And quality is what counts more to me. Say Unleashed sold millions - great and all, but that game's a mess - I don't want more messes. Even 06 hit Platinum sales, but I sure as hell don't want more of those. I'm not sure what you propose to get Sonic out of this rut if "good games" isn't the solution, because I don't really think it's "make it not like the highest rated one in 25 years and more like the games that get roundly panned". Sure there's some mythical third option, but it's really not clear what that is beyond some out of the blue, "it's a really good game in some way" option... which Mania already was.

I think it's also important to take budget into the equation here. Mania may have only sold 1 million (probably more by now honestly - IIRC those figures are from before Plus, which brought a physical release, DLC sales, and a lucrative double-pack around Christmas time), but it did so likely on a very small budget compared to the average Sonic game. Forces, bad as it was, probably cost a staggering amount to make compared to Mania, so SEGA will have seen far more return on Mania. Even bearing in mind its $20 price tag, Mania selling 1 million copies may well have been better for SEGA than had Forces sold 2 million. 

23 minutes ago, Conquering Storm’s Servant said:

Okami was a good game that sold like ass. Any wonder why we barely got a single new game beyond the 3DS Okamiden, and the studio behind it closing down? That’s partly why.

This is true - but Okami was also extremely niche. Sonic as a brand is inherently less niche. It served my point about quality not equalling sales, but I don't think it serves this point as well. 

[Eurisko]

4 hours ago, Rosaleia said:

 

Find me a classic platformer outside of legacy titles that can sell for AAA prices that was created in the past few years. Most of the examples you gave me:

1) Are legacy titles. Tomb Raider, Spyro, DOOM, and many of the titles you listed all have loyal, older fans from earlier years they can rely on who are willing to buy and promote their games. Sonic doesn't have that. After awhile, a lot of his fans leave because SEGA alienates them.

2) These games incorporate elements of traditional platforming but are not heavily reliant on the genre

3) Are low price/ free to play and rely more on micro-transations.

Classic platforming the way Mario and Sonic were on its own, generally don't sell as well. At least, not for the prices that used to be demanded. And even with Mario, Nintendo has been progressively attempting to experiment more with open world elements like with titles like Mario Odyssey. Meanwhile Sonic sells at around $40, ten dollars less than he did in the 90s-2000s and people STILL don't want to buy his games. As for Mania, It was likely a combination of both the price and it being hailed as a good Sonic game. The low price made it so that there wasn't as much of a risk involved for people who wanted to give the game a chance, but didnt want to feel like they wasted their money if it tanked.

... But, if I'm being perfectly honest? 1 million in global copies sold... isn't that great. At least for Sonic. Sure, its better than the more recent titles, and was a step in the right direction. But when thats all you can get globally on multiple ports, when games like SA2 could sell at least 1 million per console? Thats very telling of both people's expectations for gaming nowadays, and how badly SEGA's sank Sonic's reputation. Because, I agree with you, Sonic Mania wasn't a bad game. However these sales strongly suggest that because of Sonic's association with terrible games, Mania didn't sell as well as it could have. Let that sink in for a moment.  Even in the face of a better game, EVEN in spite of its good reviews, a lot of people don't want to buy it. That can only mean one thing: That, people are afraid to re-invest in this franchise. They're afraid to get attached to it, only for it to spiral down again the way Forces did.

Which brings me back to my initial point. If Sonic wants to survive, he's going to have to work extra hard to win people's trust back. And that means you can't rely on just the classic gameplay. Mania already proved that, while somewhat helpful, its not not going to save the franchise. Storyline IS important, when your a franchise with Sonic's reputation, and you need to utilize whatever you can to attract people you've lost, or are reluctant to even touch your games.

And like I said, and as you've demonstrated, the previous generations DO matter. Because its not even just a matter of them prospectively introducing their kids to the franchise, they're also a lot of the ones currently telling their families and loved ones NOT to buy Sonic games out of the personal experiences they had with the franchise. So it goes both ways. And this, is also a problem that Sonic has which Mario doesn't. Mario never had such a diverse fanbase that has yet to reconcile with both the company and one another's poor decisions and treatment of one another.

After reading that and your other posts, you’re clearly hellbent on the negative here. We could go on for weeks. 

I’ll agree to disagree and leave it at that.

[Rosaleia]

On 7/5/2019 at 4:04 PM, Tracker_TD said:

Then why can't I worry about that if Mania 2 sucks? We're not there yet. 

I mean, yeah it sucks - but I don't think selling out to a melting pot of niches is going to fix that. It can cater to all these other factions of Sonic fans, and even if that were to boost sales, it doesn't mean the quality is going to go up. And quality is what counts more to me. Say Unleashed sold millions - great and all, but that game's a mess - I don't want more messes. Even 06 hit Platinum sales, but I sure as hell don't want more of those. I'm not sure what you propose to get Sonic out of this rut if "good games" isn't the solution, because I don't really think it's "make it not like the highest rated one in 25 years and more like the games that get roundly panned". Sure there's some mythical third option, but it's really not clear what that is beyond some out of the blue, "it's a really good game in some way" option... which Mania already was.

I think it's also important to take budget into the equation here. Mania may have only sold 1 million (probably more by now honestly - IIRC those figures are from before Plus, which brought a physical release, DLC sales, and a lucrative double-pack around Christmas time), but it did so likely on a very small budget compared to the average Sonic game. Forces, bad as it was, probably cost a staggering amount to make compared to Mania, so SEGA will have seen far more return on Mania. Even bearing in mind its $20 price tag, Mania selling 1 million copies may well have been better for SEGA than had Forces sold 2 million. 

This is true - but Okami was also extremely niche. Sonic as a brand is inherently less niche. It served my point about quality not equalling sales, but I don't think it serves this point as well. 

I was focusing more on the storytelling aspect. Making branch outcomes for example doesn't mean the gameplay has to change very much. Nor is that going to change because fans want SEGA to find more things for Tails, Knuckles, Amy, Shadow etc. to do or be about as opposed to just throwing them into a game to be Sonic's cheer squad. Sonic's platforming aspect doesn't need to be removed. Just tweaked here and there. The problem is, SEGA doesn't hone in and expand upon on the things that actually worked.

Like, the chao, as well the fact there were non-platforming titles for Sonic, that were received well enough by fans and critics that SEGA.... never did anything with. Sonic historically does fairly well as a fighting game character, and his racing games have also sold fairly well. So there's no reason I see why he has to stay exclusively a platformer. Nintendo did SEGA a favor by helping people further associate Sonic with other genres through the help of Smash. Why not take advantage of that and use it as an opportunity? At this point, a fighting game would probably require far less of a budget than a platformer.