Would you still be a Sonic fan if...

[AdventChild]

I don't really mind who takes care of Sonic. I do mind that they would have to do a good job on the games, mostly gameplay wise. If Nintendo were to do it, I trust them for making good Sonic games like Mario, in the sense that they don't make it story driven or have little to no story, but have fantastic gameplay which what matters the most for me.

[T_Touchdown]

I remember a few years ago during the Sonic 2006 crisis when people were just about to give up on the Sonic franchise. People were complaining about the games introducing too many characters, 4kids voice actors, gameplay being a mess, storylines contradicting themselves, etc. Yeah yeah same old same old, the Sonic fanbase was having a fit. However, what really caught my attention was how some people wanted Sega to just give up on Sonic games and sell the franchise to Nintendo or something. I know understand that Sega hasn't exactly been creating many award winning Sonic games lately (though I do believe their improving from their 2003-2006 works), but I can't really begin to imagine Sonic without Sega. In my opinion, Sonic pretty much is Sega, even if some of the games that Sega have made lately haven't really been "great", they have still been able to keep Sonic's style that I have loved and followed throughout my entire life. Whether it's Sonic's attitude or the music artists Sega hires to make music, Sega has never really failed to deliver the Sonic style that I've fallen in love with 15 years ago. Though I wonder if Sega were ever to let go of Sonic if they were to go bankrupt or if they simply "gave up", would Sonic still feel the same to me?

Sonic Chronicles: The Dark Brotherhood was a Sonic game not made by Sega but, another 3rd party company called Bioware. Though the game was good in my opinion the simple fact that the game wasn't made by Sega still made the game feel sorta meh to me. Especially when Sonic seemed sorta out of character in some scenes, but I still enjoyed the game. And of course, we can't forget about Super Smash Bros. Brawl. Though Sonic wasn't the main character in Brawl, his character was still handled by a company other than Sega. However, I believe Nintendo did an overall good job with Sonic. He had character in his annimations and they did a good job showing Sonic's attitude(especially in the "Sonic joins the Brawl" trailer). However, Nintendo using Sonic in a game, and Nintendo owning Sonic are two completely different concepts. I just don't know how Sonic would work if he was owned by a different company than Sega such as Nintendo. Though if Nintendo ever did buy Sonic off of Sega, the first thing that would come to my head is "Will the game have dialouge that includes voice acting?" *Looks at the Mario and Zelda franchises" I'm sorry to keep using Nintendo as an example, but I just thought it would be appropriate since about 70% of the Sonic fanbase today are Nintendo fans, that and because I've heaard the idea of Nintendo buying Sonic so many times. So what do you guys think, would you continue running along Sonic's side if he was owned by another company?

I understand what your saying. To be honest, I am one of those diehard Sonic fans that will play a sonic game regardless of whether it's good or bad, and this just may be the fan that's talking, but I think the people who bag on today's Sonic games and say they aren't that great are full of shit. Yes, they're not full of WOW all the time, but come on people, get your head out of the gutter and stop living in the 90's. There's only one direction that we're going and that's forward, whether you like it or not. I just think the critics don't give these games a chance.

Anyways, to address your primary question, It would have to depend. I think Sega is still doing a good job with Sonic and I wouldn't think of telling them to throw in the towel yet, but if they did, they should at least sell to a company that will give the Sonic franchise its character. Like you, I'm not to keen of Sega selling out because Sonic is, basically, Sega, but what they do is up to them. If they should sell out, Nintendo should be No. 1 on the contacts list.

[LunarEdge]

It would be sad to see Sonic NOT a part of Sega anymore, but I would still play the games if he was owned by another company. I would personally prefer Nintendo to have the blue hedgehog since Nintendo already has an array of original characters, I think Sonic would fit in perfectly. Of course, the story-lines/some characters won't be as dark as they use to be, but whatever. Also, if Nintendo owned Sonic out of all the other developers, that only guarantees Sonic's inclusion is such Nintendo games like Smash Brothers. That could also mean things like Sonic themed video game consoles (DS, Wii?), and such, even though I doubt Nintendo will go that far with Sonic if they did own him.

If Sonic was part of Capcom, he will most likely be included in a majority of the future Capcom versus series. Also, Capcom tends to keep a game in it's roots. All Megaman games that were released that weren't battle network/starforce were the old 2D style with some add-ons (Megaman X, Zero, ZX, ZXA). So if Capcom had Sonic, they would probably release 2D after 2D game... although I'm afraid they'll do the same to Sonic that they did to Megaman (Sonic 10 anyone?).

[eXtaticus]

Short answer: no.

[vger]

Hmm, that's a very good question, and the simple answer is I have no idea.

It would all depend on how well the ran Sonic (okay bad pun) other than that there's really not much more I can say, I don't know what the best way to run Sonic is.

[Phos]

I've always though it's kind of funny when people profess that they wish Nintendo would buy Sonic. I can tell that they're imagining that the same team who makes Mario games would make Sonic games. While that hypothetical scenario might work out pretty well, that's not how Nintendo thinks. More likely they'd end up getting some C-list team of theirs to throw together one Sonic game every time Nintendo realizes they don't have any variety of Mario game coming out that same year. These games would probably be unremarkable 2.5D games with about the same amount of care as Excite Truck and the same design philosophy behind Sonic Rush. Nintendo has no reason to expend Galaxy levels of efforts on a game that would only compete with their other games.

But that's even assuming that Nintendo had any interest in bothering to buy Sonic. He was never a big seller in Japan (Or maybe that's revisionist history from Sega and Unleashed apologists), and he's been waining everywhere else, so I doubt Nintendo would even bother making a bid. More likely he'd be snapped up by Activision and go the way of Crash and Spyro, being traded between a collection of unremarkable developers.

Best case: Hirokazu Yasuhara pulls some strings or whatever metaphor you want to use and gets Namco to buy Sonic. Actually, I think that's a lot better than what we have going on now. It's also kind of funny, because before Sega had Sonic, they could basically be described as "Poor man's Namco". Sonic would secure Namco a foothold on the consoles of the day and would allow them to weather the collapsing arcade industry.

Edited February 6, 2010 by Phos

[Dejablue]

I probably would. I'm really not that connected to anything else Sega does.