Rounding out Sonic character's personalities

[StaticMania]

Sooo, a common complaint with Sonic characters, even among fans, is how basic and 2 dimensional their characters are? As if there's not enough there or there's just...only enough there to actually be a character worth focus.

A character like Amy is only really known for chasing Sonic and being nice, Tails is the smart guy (who may be the idealistic child), Espio's...a serious ninja guy. These are all just the base traits for the characters and that's fine, but that's usually all there is to them -- especially when written poorly.

What characters do you think are lacking in this aspect, what other traits could those characters have that may turn them into a well rounded character?

My example: Big the Cat, He's a simple guy who loves to relax. He's pretty much only interested in Froggy and Fishing. I like him, but...I really don't ever know what writers really think to do with him that's different. They usually don't, it's usually just froggy or fishing related and it can be nice sometimes.

I know all Sonic characters are drifters of a sort, but I was thinking what if Big was like Sonic in a way. In that he also loves to travel. As a reference to how his gag in SA2 and Secret rings, I also think it'd be a neat idea that the character who was made to contrast the series major theme was the one other character who leads a "similar" life style to that of the main character. He doesn't have to live as fast paced as Sonic, he can take things slow, but a simple guy who loves discovering new places sounds neat. New places to fish, to meet new people/creatures, and just have a good ol' time. That's it's own kind of adventure.

Just to give him anything else to work with.

[Fire-N-Space]

"Amy is only really known for chasing Sonic" that part of Amy died in 2013.

[E-122-Psi]

I admit that, for all I complain about this factor, I'm actually often at odds with HOW to flesh out a lot of the characters. In fact cases I think a project has successfully done such I actually tend to have a reaction of "Wow that's pretty cool, I wouldn't have thought of that, I would have just kept to the same safe shit with them". eg. Boom Sonic and Tails.

For Amy and Big, I think Team Rose is untapped potential in terms of a vessel for fleshing these characters out, along with Cream. I think a common problem is that often teams are just used as formal fractions for the characters to take action in, we don't get a lot of casual character driven interactions with them outside of work. There are hints of this with Team Rose since they joined for personal motivations. Cream regularly hangs out with Amy and Big is shown hanging out with Amy in TSR. They make clear this lot are genuine pals to some level but we don't go into much depth with it.

I'd love to see how a fish out of water like Big immerses with another group really. He's established as a guy whose usually alone minding his own business with himself and Froggy, they actually establish that as a reason he's so close to Froggy, he didn't really think anyone gave a shit about him until Sonic saved them. There's potential here in giving him some other long term friendships with sapient beings.

There's a fair bit to do for Team Rose's lot really because they're really the 'underdog' team, the lot that force themselves into the fray and aren't really regarded as the go-to badass heroes. We know Amy wants to prove herself as a self proposed challenge, but what of her friends. They've established they don't actually have much of a backbone unless really forced, maybe she'd be eager to help them stand out, which could really bring out her non-Sonic focus while reviving her extroverted bubbly side in terms of being a foil.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

51 minutes ago, StaticMania said:

Sooo, a common complaint with Sonic characters, even among fans, is how basic and 2 dimensional their characters are? As if there's not enough there or there's just...only enough there to actually be a character worth focus.

First things first: do people even know what those 2 dimensions are and what makes a 3 dimensional character?

Because far too often they throw them around like buzzwords for things they like and things they don’t like. I’m hear to tell people right now that, if they want these characters to be more than the cardboard portrayals that they see them as, then there is a definition of these dimensions to understand before that can even be achieved.

 

[Kuzu]

59 minutes ago, CrownSlayer’s Shadow said:

First things first: do people even know what those 2 dimensions are and what makes a 3 dimensional character?

Because far too often they throw them around like buzzwords for things they like and things they don’t like. I’m hear to tell people right now that, if they want these characters to be more than the cardboard portrayals that they see them as, then there is a definition of these dimensions to understand before that can even be achieved.

 

OP did point out everyone's most basic and consistent character traits. 

I think the real problem is Sega's priorities when it comes to characterization...in that their priorities are low. I really have gotten the feeling that they intentionally keep the characters as simple as possible so that they don't have to worry about that stuff when crafting their game. A simple a character that you can just throw in anywhere and just half-ass an explanation for it. 

This is especially apparent to me given how much creative control they are exercising over the alternative media; they have a specific version of the characters that they want to sell, and are enforcing that; i.e. characters besides Cream aren't allowed to have parents, Sonic can't cry, Sonic has to win, Shadow is Vegeta, etc etc. 

 

 

So it's not that the cast can't be fleshed out, I just don't think Sega will allow it. In theory, there are whole bunch of areas that could be explored with these characters, but since they're designed to be cute, cool, and colorful mascots, there's only so much Sega will allow. 

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

17 minutes ago, Kuzu said:

OP did point out everyone's most basic and consistent character traits. 

Yes, but those basic traits pointed out are just but one dimension of each character. Most people don’t understand enough to know what makes a character’s second or third dimension, which probably contributes somewhat to Sega’s intent on characterization to market them.

[DabigRG]

Oh, someone actually made a thread like this? And it's Static! Great idea, man/miss!

There are a variety of ways to either organize or categorize the character's personalities that help put them into context as preparation for brainstorming ways to expand on them. 

4 hours ago, StaticMania said:

 

A character like Amy is only really known for chasing Sonic and being nice, Tails is the smart guy (who may be the idealistic child), Espio's...a serious ninja guy. These are all just the base traits for the characters and that's fine, but that's usually all there is to them -- especially when written poorly.

 

I might be worth noting how Espio is more one dimensional for comparison, which still fits the point of the topic.

3 hours ago, CrownSlayer’s Shadow said:

First things first: do people even know what those 2 dimensions are and what makes a 3 dimensional character?

Because far too often they throw them around like buzzwords for things they like and things they don’t like. I’m hear to tell people right now that, if they want these characters to be more than the cardboard portrayals that they see them as, then there is a definition of these dimensions to understand before that can even be achieved.

 

 

2 hours ago, Kuzu said:

OP did point out everyone's most basic and consistent character traits. 

 

He means that there are arguably, hm, three specific areas that constitute being a rounded character.

Servant, would you please repost your list from however long before?

[StaticMania]

5 hours ago, Kuzu said:

I really have gotten the feeling that they intentionally keep the characters as simple as possible so that they don't have to worry about that stuff when crafting their game.

There's nothing too complex about Amy wanting to go on independently Adventures too with the added bonus of impressing Sonic. That was a nice direction to potentially take the character in if they really wanted.

Heroes possibly showed what could come of that, but how we really get to that point is glossed over...compared to Team Dark who's actual team formation is shown. If Heroes had a more...nuanced story, this could've added a bit. Like why does Amy even team up with Cream and Big and how does she really do to inspire them to keep going.

She, like Tails, wants to be like Sonic, but she clearly has her own way of doing things. She's pushy and forceful, which is unlike Sonic, but she's so compassionate and inspiring (supposedly) that maybe a Big the Cat who actually thought it was Sonic who stole Froggy and knew he'd never be able to catch up would be motivated by Amy to do something about it. Same for Cream.

This is all still really simple, but it can add so much to a character who often doesn't get to do much.

[Natie]

Simple characters are fine, they just need to be put in interesting situations that either play to or challenge their core personality and beliefs.

[E-122-Psi]

6 minutes ago, Natie said:

Simple characters are fine, they just need to be put in interesting situations that either play to or challenge their core personality and beliefs.

Pretty much. Having a simplistic approach to storytelling isn't a bad thing, so long as you are able to flesh it out. A lot of iconic characters are known for some key defining traits or quirks for example, it's just that the writers know how to branch those out into all sorts of different sub traits and deliver circumstances that express them in different ways.

Sonic's 'attitude' for example can be depicted in multiple different ways. The SOJ depictions tend to favour depicting that as making him the cool headed free spirit who takes things as they go and delivers wisdom as he goes along, while the SOA depictions tend to depict it as a more impetuous overconfident rebel who can sometimes be reckless and arrogant. We've seen glimpses of BOTH in the games really (compare the Storybooks Sonic to Lost Worlds for example) and I think because of that, in spite of questionable writing, I can't consider the main depiction of Sonic one note, they have to some level shown the many facets his seemingly simplistic set of traits can embody, both in terms of fundamental strengths and flaws, even if they maybe could do a better job making that feel like one consistent character sometimes.

I think this is something to consider in terms of fleshing out the cast, that one trait can actually represent many depending on storytelling and circumstance.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

3 hours ago, DabigRG said:

He means that there are arguably, hm, three specific areas that constitute being a rounded character.

Servant, would you please repost your list from however long before?

I have it by memory.

Physiology - simply put, what a character looks like and what they can physically do. Sonic’s a blue hedgehog that can run super Sonic, Tails is an orange twin tailed fox and child prodigies, Shadow is a black and red hedgehog that can warp space and time, and that’s just keeping it brief.

A character with only just one dimension is the equivalent of all the unnamed characters you see in Forces civilians or the unnamed background characters you see in IDW. Or just Lanolin.

Sociology - essentially how the character lives, social status, their background, origins, etc. Knuckles lives alone in Angel Island guarding a powerful massive gemstone that has been part of his ancestral past for thousands of years, Eggman often travels the world in giant flying battleships or his Egg Mobile threatening the world with world domination, Shadow is a loner who’s past involves surviving a massacre that killed his sister figure, the Rouge is a government spy and treasure hunter who seeks all of the world’s gems.

This second dimension would essentially be most of the named case, but some are less detailed than others. Characters like Shadow and Knuckles have a fully fleshed our backstory, others are hardly more detailed than a few sentences only serving to giving them simple motives of doing something—and you can see here where characters like Knuckles and Shadow can garner such high popularity while characters like Rouge aren’t as prominent by comparison. You can also see this is the area that the Blue Blur himself is somewhat lacking.

All of this builds into (or rather is supposed to build into) the third dimension, their Psychology, or simply put what goes on in the character’s mind and why.  Knuckles living alone and guarding that powerful gem on his island makes him naturally distrusting of those like Rouge who land on his turf, as they would seek to steal it; his lack of living with people also lead him to be guilible and easy for someone like Eggman to trick in the past since he hasn’t been socialized to many people. Shadow’s loss of things he held dear 50 years ago by the world he was so curious of, a life he can’t get back would lead him on a quest of revenge against that very world he feels responsible. 
 

This third dimension is less well-connected in current Sonic characters than others, and where a lot of them seem to be going through motions for the sake of motions. Sure you know Rouge is a treasure hunter that collects gems, but you don’t really know what for and why beyond their beauty—does she sell them for any kind of funds or is she simply just a collector? Heck, her angle as a government spy is more fleshed out here than her treasure hunting interests, as it plays into her character being one of stealth and infiltration. This is also where characters like Shadow stand out the absolute most compared to majority of this cast, and is also the very dimension the Deadly Six lack beyond being a group of technopaths founded by Master Zik. You can also see why I’m personally so anal about Knuckles, the Master Emerald, and Angel Island, because he could shine even more exploring this area and learning more about his past up until now, like they did in SA1.

When you look as these three dimensions then look at the Sonic cast, you really begin to see how much of a mess things are and where they’re really missing things. A well rounded character has a stable footing all three dimensions that shapes them to the audience, and is essentially how these characters can draw their audience to who they are. But when dimensions are missing and poorly developed, then that’s where we start seeing these characters as cardboard stock cliches that far mirror far too much of the generic tropes for the sake of appearances rather than being relatable. And beyond their cool powers, or lack thereof, how do you connect to characters when you don’t really grasp their actions? What really makes that character stand out from the others among them that make them who they are and what they believe in?

And you really get into, you also see where the frustration comes when characters act outside of what they do now compared to what they’ve done before, such as Tails randomly throwing a fit at Sonic practically out of nowhere in Lost Worlds, or not even putting up a fight in Forces; or the cast being nothing more than glorified cheerleaders in Generations; or why aliens in Shadow’s background feels so patchwork and...well, alienating, among other things.

That’s really just a summary of things, but if you want rounded multi-dimensional characters, then these are dimensions to look into, as this is what three dimensional characters are, how they become relatable, and where you give them depth. And it’s also here where you can see the difference between the praise in works like the comics and scorn for the more recent characterizations in the games.

[Kuzu]

27 minutes ago, Natie said:

Simple characters are fine, they just need to be put in interesting situations that either play to or challenge their core personality and beliefs.

I think this is ultimately the best point; while  the characters aren't going to change who they are fundamentally, they can be put into interesting situations that expose other parts of their character.

I guess the biggest problem is that the games never really do that all that much, given the plots and situations they find themselves in are rather simplistic and onenote. I guess this is where alternate media like the comics thrive, as they actually allow these characters to be used in different ways...to varying levels of success. 

But shit man, the comics gave us character dynamics we never see in the games like Knuckles and Shadow, and shit like that is what I love. 

[DabigRG]

I see that other threads about personalities and characterization have popped up since this one, so I wanted to give it some attention as an icebreaker.

One of my favorite systems for examining character personalities at very least putting them into a manageable context are the four Temperaments. Based on the old theory of body humours reflecting the deficiencies of one's personality, the five temperaments use the four emotional states to describe the various traits of someone in a generalized manner. Sonic is funny in this regard because when I first really getting into understanding them beyond the superficials, the Sonic TVTropes pages made some peculiar changes in that regard that are interesting to think about, but clearly needed to be changed after investigation(Cream originally described as Melancholic and briefly became Choleric at one point).

So outlining the major recurring cast by convenient teams, I would say the respective temperaments of each are:

Sonic Sanguine with varying degrees of Choleric and Phlegmatic

Tails Phlegmatic/Sanguine with leans of Melancholic

Knuckles Melanchilic or Choleric/Phlegmatic

 

Amy Sanguine/Choleric

Cream Phlegmatic/Sanguine

Big Phlegmatic

 

Eggman Choleric/Sanguine

Orbot Melancholic

Cubot Sanguine?

Metal Melancholic?

 

Tikal Phlegmatic

Chaos Phlegmatic normally

Omochao Sanguine

 

Shadow Melancholic

Rouge Sanguine/Phlegmatic

Omega Melancholic with a lean towards Choleric

 

Vector Sanguine or Choleric

Espio Melancholic

Charmy Sanguine

 

Jet Choleric

Wave Melancholic

Storm Phlegmatic?

 

Blaze Melancholic

Silver Sanguine? He has a little of everything but Melancholic, tbh

Marine Sanguine

Nega Phlegmatic/Melancholic

 

Zavok Melancholic with bouts of Choleric

Zazz Choleric

Zeena Phlegmatic/Choleric? She's a little inconsistent across sources

Zik Phlegmatic or Melancholic

Zomom Phlegmatic with hints of Melancholic

Zor Melancholic

 

Your mileage may vary on those, but the point is to gain a generally idea if the character's traits so we can eventually look at where they can be fleshed out or expanded

.

On 9/17/2020 at 9:03 PM, StaticMania said:

There's nothing too complex about Amy wanting to go on independently Adventures too with the added bonus of impressing Sonic. That was a nice direction to potentially take the character in if they really wanted.

Heroes possibly showed what could come of that, but how we really get to that point is glossed over...compared to Team Dark who's actual team formation is shown. If Heroes had a more...nuanced story, this could've added a bit. Like why does Amy even team up with Cream and Big and how does she really do to inspire them to keep going.

She, like Tails, wants to be like Sonic, but she clearly has her own way of doing things. She's pushy and forceful, which is unlike Sonic, but she's so compassionate and inspiring (supposedly) that maybe a Big the Cat who actually thought it was Sonic who stole Froggy and knew he'd never be able to catch up would be motivated by Amy to do something about it. Same for Cream.

This is all still really simple, but it can add so much to a character who often doesn't get to do much.

You know, it always was weird how Team Sonic had the opening cutscene at least show the other two finding Sonic, but Team Rose starts with those three already together and just hanging out on the beach. 

In fact, their actual meeting is reserved for the manual!

[StaticMania]

I had an idea about Cream...

Since a miscellaneous complaint about her is that she stole Amy's compassion and empathy, why not make something out of that?

She's innocent and it's a common thing in fiction that children are pure and that incorruptible purity might change a villain in a similar vein to Amy's speech to Shadow and Gamma. But children can't give meaningful speeches like that and won't even fully understand why a bad guy is bad.

But let's say she's inspired by Amy in a way to be an empath to villains, try to change their ways and be nice to them and  she's not effective...because she's a child who's attempt appealing to reason makes things worse by simplifying thing and unintentionally trivializing a villain's motives.

I feel like I was gettin' somewhere...

[SBR2]

Am I weird for thinking the characterization is fine? Like I don't know maybe the characters aren't the most deep or complex but maybe there's nothing wrong with that.

[StaticMania]

This isn't really about being deep, it's just giving them "more"...

These are simple characters, you should be able to define them as is with 2 to 3 traits.

That's totally fine, but it allows for "more".

[E-122-Psi]

I'm not sure how unpopular this is but.....I kinda want Shadow to be more comical.

Like not turned into just a gag or parody of himself or anything, but just like these little 'not so above it all' moments he loses his mystique. Think like how the comics would give him the odd funny expression or childish remark, like him openly loving his bike or getting flustered around Blaze, just giving him this little fun tint of humanity through unusual funny depths, especially how most of these moments helped give him little bits of chemistry with the other characters. He doesn't have to be a wacky extrovert like Sonic or anything he just has to have odd moment the stock 'stoic guy' veil is dragged off him to show a new side.

I think this is something that is sometimes forgotten by writers. Making a character more quirky isn't the same as just flanderizing them into one-note comic relief. A lot of characters get their best moments from their trademark quirks, it's just whether the writers capitalise and develop them properly. I think this is the issue with Amy for example, that rather than fleshing her out in a way that played on her bubbly energy, they just took that off her because it made her 'silly' and turned her into a smart sensible adult out of nowhere.

This is why I like 'robotic blood knight' Omega and 'dorky' Silver got capitalised on TSR for example.

[LeviTheGreat]

i've said this a million times and i'll say it again.If you're going to make a major character.You should make at least one decent game in their name (and i'm not talking about tail's adventure).I mean if they wanted too they could get the story board team together and write out the whole backstory for a charcater  but we know Sega is not willing to go through all that trouble to make fans happy.

[Scritch the Cat]

It wouldn't hurt just to give characters some new traits and interests, provided they don't conflict with anything, don't violate SEGA's guidelines, and aren't super-offensive to audiences.  Real people aren't just their jobs.  I have many interests.  You have many interests.  The same can be true of fictional characters.  Sonic's "job" is to run fast and flip around to defeat evil, but that doesn't mean that on the side, he can't also enjoy writing limericks.  Amy has a crush on Sonic but that shouldn't prevent her from having an unrelated hobby, like, say, playing clarinet.  Espio is mostly just a ninja and detective who doesn't seem to have much of identity besides those jobs; he could also be a painter without sacrificing them, why not?

[Kuzu]

On 12/4/2020 at 3:03 PM, E-122-Psi said:

I'm not sure how unpopular this is but.....I kinda want Shadow to be more comical.

Like not turned into just a gag or parody of himself or anything, but just like these little 'not so above it all' moments he loses his mystique. Think like how the comics would give him the odd funny expression or childish remark, like him openly loving his bike or getting flustered around Blaze, just giving him this little fun tint of humanity through unusual funny depths, especially how most of these moments helped give him little bits of chemistry with the other characters. He doesn't have to be a wacky extrovert like Sonic or anything he just has to have odd moment the stock 'stoic guy' veil is dragged off him to show a new side.

This is more or less what they've been doing with him lately, and it's why so many are pissed off about his writing lmao

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

1 hour ago, Kuzu said:

This is more or less what they've been doing with him lately, and it's why so many are pissed off about his writing lmao

It’s less that and more that they’re making him dumber than he really should be.

He’s made mistakes before, and he’s made bad decisions in Archie, but they were true to his pragmatism as a character and were at the very least thought out despite their problems.

In IDW? He fights as zombot swarm and gets in contact with them, then ignores calls to run to help delay the infection rate because he found it cowardly. That’s too stupid even for (especially for) Shadow’s character. Literally nothing about that made any sense.

[Kuzu]

2 hours ago, CrownSlayer’s Shadow said:

It’s less that and more that they’re making him dumber than he really should be.

He’s made mistakes before, and he’s made bad decisions in Archie, but they were true to his pragmatism as a character and were at the very least thought out despite their problems.

In IDW? He fights as zombot swarm and gets in contact with them, then ignores calls to run to help delay the infection rate because he found it cowardly. That’s too stupid even for (especially for) Shadow’s character. Literally nothing about that made any sense.

That's part of my point; he's made mistakes, but they're "justified" mistakes that still kind of protect the character's dignity. It's only really recently that they've really started just to make him really fallible and a fuck up. 

Things like the Twitter takeovers, his Boom incarnation (minus the game), and his overall writing in TSR. They're trying to make his serious attitude into a comedic trait. 

[E-122-Psi]

There's a difference between making a character having some funny dents and the whole 'comedy = incompetent comic relief' deal.

Again Archie found a balance of him being serious and stoic as his core trait but still having humorous little dents of humanity and fallibility and having things play against his trademark dignity without feeling forced, while the complaint issued towards some of these later ones seems to be more that they're reducing him to a parody of himself (quite ironically in Boom's case since the reason he ended up kinda slapdash was because they didn't WANT to make him into too much of a joke).

A lot of characters can work better and gain more depths by being allowed to be part of the comedy and losing their dignity sometimes (see Aku in Samurai Jack, Coco in Crash Bandicoot or Tigress in Kung Fu Panda, all started off kind of stock archetypes until the writers became interested in intertwining them into the franchise's humour) it's just a case of doing it in a way that still respects their core character.

I do definitely understand what you mean, since arguably even those examples have suffered occasions of doing it badly, largely because some writers don't know when to stop or how to still keep it within the realms of their original character. I think Robotnik having some Eggman-ish arrogance and humour in the later half of SatAm was a good idea for example, but I think the problem was they sometimes equated it to making him more of a bungling and unsavvy joke who made really obvious mistakes, to the point you wondered WHY he was even treated as a threat. Some will argue the comics version is closer to compromising his original sinister and savvy personality with some comical dents and arrogance.

[Dr. Detective]

With regards to Big the Cat, I actually think Big is the perfect example of a static character that's perfectly fine remaining a static character. Those exist intentionally as well. Not everyone necessarily needs more rounded out personalities honestly. The thing about Big that's charming is how simple he is. He's a simpleton. There's not much to him and that's the point. That's why he works so well as Mr. Cameo. Honestly, the thing they should be utilizing Big for more often is to just have him be someone who appears in the background a lot more often then he does.

Or in a random cutscene, he'll find something that the characters we're actually following need and toss it over his shoulder and leave because it's not Froggy, with said mcguffin rolling harmlessly at the feet of our main characters who nab it and head off to deal with the threat they're after. 

Something like that. 

Honestly, to this day, the conception behind his character as the innocent bystander who just happens to be places he shouldn't be and has nothing to do with the world ending conflict he's inexplicably in the middle of remains one of the most creative ideas this franchise has ever come up with to me. It still baffles me that it happened. 

 

[Kuzu]

39 minutes ago, E-122-Psi said:

There's a difference between making a character having some funny dents and the whole 'comedy = incompetent comic relief' deal.

Again Archie found a balance of him being serious and stoic as his core trait but still having humorous little dents of humanity and fallibility and having things play against his trademark dignity without feeling forced, while the complaint issued towards some of these later ones seems to be more that they're reducing him to a parody of himself (quite ironically in Boom's case since the reason he ended up kinda slapdash was because they didn't WANT to make him into too much of a joke).

A lot of characters can work better and gain more depths by being allowed to be part of the comedy and losing their dignity sometimes (see Aku in Samurai Jack, Coco in Crash Bandicoot or Tigress in Kung Fu Panda, all started off kind of stock archetypes until the writers became interested in intertwining them into the franchise's humour) it's just a case of doing it in a way that still respects their core character.

I do definitely understand what you mean, since arguably even those examples have suffered occasions of doing it badly, largely because some writers don't know when to stop or how to still keep it within the realms of their original character. I think Robotnik having some Eggman-ish arrogance and humour in the later half of SatAm was a good idea for example, but I think the problem was they sometimes equated it to making him more of a bungling and unsavvy joke who made really obvious mistakes, to the point you wondered WHY he was even treated as a threat. Some will argue the comics version is closer to compromising his original sinister and savvy personality with some comical dents and arrogance.

It honestly depends on what the story is trying to accomplish; balancing a character's competence with comic relief is always going to be a hard sell. Make them too badass to the exclusion of any humor, they'll come off as dull and boring. Make them too comedic, then nobody will take them seriously and find them annoying. 

I like this video a lot, because it goes into detail on how this balance is important and why leaning too far into either direction can yield bad results.