Replaying Sonic the Hedgehog reveals it was kind of bad
- Thread starter Cindi Mayweather
- Start date
QisTopTier
XisBannedTier
S3&K is 2d sonic perfection like generations is 3d perfection
edit: gotta go fast
edit: gotta go fast
Cindi Mayweather
Member
Nope. Special stages are generally bad in Sonic. Sonic 1 has unfun mazes that are just rote memorization. 2's stages have wonky camera angles and I don't like those either. 3 and Knuckles special stages are just boring.
Also, getting the chaos rings is a bit easy after having the games down so I just ignore them. Going through Sonic 2's special stages is pure muscle memory at this point. Doesn't help that chaos emeralds already break what I find to be shallow games. I get nothing out of unlocking them, and blazing through stages as Super Sonic would be boring.
Funnily, I loved special stages as a kid. Especially 2's. Going in circles while playing co op are good memories. But I don't think they're fun at all now.
I imagine a lot of the Sonic CD hype is a combination of people who wasted money on a Sega CD trying to justify their waste of money and people who never had a Sega CD trying to justify being jealous of those that got to play Sonic CD back in the day.
The level design of Sonic CD is just awful. It's not quite as bad as Dimps level design, but I liken it to someone loading a bunch of level tiles into a shotgun and shooting it at a wall.
Cindi Mayweather
Member
I'm glad there's something we agree on!
I was thinking more about having to preserve your rings to collect them, since a few pages ago you were debating with someone about Sonic not having options for more difficulty like Mario.
Combichristoffersen
Combovers don't work when there is no hair
Pretty much. I bought the PC version of Sonic CD back in the mid to late 90s because it was this mythical Sonic game that had been praised as the most amazing thing since sliced bread. I was greeted by this awesome animated intro that got me even more hyped, and then.. Then came the godawful level design and the terrible bosses. That was when I realized the hype was a lie and the game is pretty damn bad.
As for Dimps level design vs. Sonic CD design, where Dimps has hold right to fall into pitfalls, Sonic CD is pretty much like what you described. Shit just fired at a wall in the hopes that it would make a somewhat playable level.
Still has the best soundtrack..
Yoshi
Headmaster of Console Warrior Jugendstrafanstalt
In Super Mario games, falling off a platform does not necessarily mean death either. There are levels where it does, but even in harder levels, like SMB3's e-Reader level Para Beetle Challenge, which is all about "make a mistake -> die", this is not always true, in fact, in the beginning, there are always the clouds protecting you from death. Also, the funny thing is, when Sonic gets more demanding wrt pits of doom, people cry like crazy, the bottomless pits in the Dimps games made so many people furious. Same for Unleashed, to the point that Sega felt forced to add warning signs in Generations...
Let me tell you this about Ducktales: I beat Ducktales 1 without any problems on my first try (two years ago, at age 27), but when I first played through Sonic 1 (at age 15, so not as a small child) it took me three tries. Sonic 1 definitely is not that much easier than Ducktales 1.
Shadoken
Member
You just made me install Generations on my PC again and replay. Its just such a fun game lol
Combichristoffersen
Combovers don't work when there is no hair
Shitty, tiny image, but it was the only one I could find. But the warning signs weren't a new addition, they first appeared in the Game Gear version of Sonic 1.
http://info.sonicretro.org/Sonic_th...ween_the_Master_System_and_Game_Gear_versions
My copy came free when my grandma bought her IBM computer. I still have the OEM disc somewhere. But yeah, never been a fan of the game. I loved the cutscenes and music but the game itself I could never get into at all. I've tried so many times.
Yoshi
Headmaster of Console Warrior Jugendstrafanstalt
Shitty, tiny image, but it was the only one I could find. But the warning signs weren't a new addition, they first appeared in the Game Gear version of Sonic 1.
http://info.sonicretro.org/Sonic_th...ween_the_Master_System_and_Game_Gear_versions
Well, the reasons given for the Master System games don't apply for Generations and the similar Unleashed before it didn't have them. Yes, warning signs are not a new invention, but them being used so consistently to warn about pits was unusual for the series.
Daffy Duck
Member
Sonic 3 special stages are the worst, I love the special stages in Sonic 2.
I must be the only sonic fan who hasn't played to completion a sonic game post S3&K, I left it there because I really feel they offered nothing of the experience I want.
QisTopTier
XisBannedTier
Yeah, the idea that Sonic 1 is easier than Ducktales is lol. Like, that's just wrong. I beat Ducktales my very first time playing when I was like 10 years old. Sonic took me probably a dozen sittings to finally get through.
Lord British
Member
I see we have entered the Sonic CD bashing stage of the thread.
It has the best level design in the series, if you want to get the good ending. Extremely challenging and intricate. All about exploration and discovery.
Most people don't seem to care about playing the game properly. That's fine. Life is short. But, when people describe the level design of the painstakingly thoughtful Sonic CD as in any way arbitrary or haphazard, it doesn't ring true to me.
It has the best level design in the series, if you want to get the good ending. Extremely challenging and intricate. All about exploration and discovery.
Most people don't seem to care about playing the game properly. That's fine. Life is short. But, when people describe the level design of the painstakingly thoughtful Sonic CD as in any way arbitrary or haphazard, it doesn't ring true to me.
Combichristoffersen
Combovers don't work when there is no hair
It was unusual, but a nice addition IMO. Sonic games had suffered from the Dimps school of level design long enough.
Personally I think Ducktales is actually way harder than Sonic 1, heh.
Mexen
Member
Oh, man. Even as a kid, Labyrinth Zone was the only level where I could not be bothered with collecting rings or going for perfect runs. I remember this one time thinking I was just lucky, there was no feeling of "yeah-I-am-good-at-this" but rather it felt like the game felt sorry for me or something. I accidentally found out about the bubbles hahaha I just stood there and bam air! Weeks, man. Weeks.
I had Rambo III, Fatal Labyrinth/Labyrinth of Death, Streets of Rage/Bare Knuckle, Tetris, a 'Paint' type game, Ultimate Mortal Kombat 3 and a soccer/football game,so I had the luxury of switching from Sonic but man, fucking Labyrinth Zone.
I had Rambo III, Fatal Labyrinth/Labyrinth of Death, Streets of Rage/Bare Knuckle, Tetris, a 'Paint' type game, Ultimate Mortal Kombat 3 and a soccer/football game,so I had the luxury of switching from Sonic but man, fucking Labyrinth Zone.
Ok. Disclaimer. I was bad and did not read your op. Assuming you want to read all the replies to your thread.
You are wrong. No that isn't opinion. It is just a matter of playing Sonic and Mario on day 1.
I played sonic 1 and wondered why it held a candle to super Mario 3...let alone super Mario world. It was so damn simple. It had an awesome bonus stage. But ya. I do think Sonic 1 was so very important, but sub par to smb 3 and smb world.
Sonic 2? It changed. It wasn't worse or better. It was just so damn fun. That extended to 3 and Knuckles.
There is a reason sonic generations got good reviews and there is a reason people are crazy about this old-school yet new Sonic.
This comes from a Nes and Snes man. In fact my first Sega was a Dreamcast.
You are wrong. No that isn't opinion. It is just a matter of playing Sonic and Mario on day 1.
I played sonic 1 and wondered why it held a candle to super Mario 3...let alone super Mario world. It was so damn simple. It had an awesome bonus stage. But ya. I do think Sonic 1 was so very important, but sub par to smb 3 and smb world.
Sonic 2? It changed. It wasn't worse or better. It was just so damn fun. That extended to 3 and Knuckles.
There is a reason sonic generations got good reviews and there is a reason people are crazy about this old-school yet new Sonic.
This comes from a Nes and Snes man. In fact my first Sega was a Dreamcast.
Yeah, people who slam Sonic CD's level design and then praise Sonic 3's...yikes.
Yoshi
Headmaster of Console Warrior Jugendstrafanstalt
Well, I like Dimp's games (at least up to Colours).
I'm quite certain I played Sonic CD the right way, and yes it was a lot about exploration. But I think that is the reason, it does not have the best, but the worst level design out of the Mega Drive Sonics, because Sonic does not excell in exploration, Mario's gameplay is way more suited to it. Sonic CD suffers in the speed department as a result of this level design and therefore I feel Sonic CD; while still good, is the worst of the Mega Drive Sonics. We probably have our list of Mega Drive Sonics completely reversed, seeing your comments, for me it goes
Sonic 2
Sonic 3 & K
Sonic 1
Sonic CD
(Knuckles Chaotix)
SkylineRKR
Member
Sonic CD is a garbage Sonic game. There are lots of blatant issues with it. But I still enjoy playing it, because its so different.
The level design is atrocious, its like those 90's level makers I tinkered with. Slapping objects here and there and some spikes there and be done with it. It hardly makes sense. The gameplay, the spindash, is bad too. Taxman didn't implement the Sonic 2 spindash for nothing. Because the original is shit. The peel out makes no sense as the game isn't about building momentum at all. That move would've made more sense in Sonic 2 or 3, though it would probably break those games. Its probably been thrown into the dumpster for a reason.
What I like about Sonic CD is how different it is, and the fact you could time travel to the past and get very peaceful future stages. However, whats the use of the Future signs? None. And again, this feature was better suited for Sonic 2. As Sonic CD has not many places you could build up speed. For that reason a lot of stages have springs opposed to eachother which makes the level design look dumb. In general, the time travel mechanic goes against how Sonic CD is designed.
The bosses are by far the worst and least challenging. The Metal Sonic race was nice on paper, but that level doesn't really flow nicely as well. I get that Sonic CD is more about exploration and finding posts and generators, and trust me its how I always play it, but the Metal Sonic race should've been more like it would end up to be in Generations.
Sonic CD ended up on a lot of GOAT shortlists and I can see why lots of gamers who tried it afterward are puzzled about this. Sonic CD is absolutely no patch on Sonic 2 but it being so radically different might save it somewhat. And the time travel mechanic is awesome (if it wasn't implemented so poorly).
The level design is atrocious, its like those 90's level makers I tinkered with. Slapping objects here and there and some spikes there and be done with it. It hardly makes sense. The gameplay, the spindash, is bad too. Taxman didn't implement the Sonic 2 spindash for nothing. Because the original is shit. The peel out makes no sense as the game isn't about building momentum at all. That move would've made more sense in Sonic 2 or 3, though it would probably break those games. Its probably been thrown into the dumpster for a reason.
What I like about Sonic CD is how different it is, and the fact you could time travel to the past and get very peaceful future stages. However, whats the use of the Future signs? None. And again, this feature was better suited for Sonic 2. As Sonic CD has not many places you could build up speed. For that reason a lot of stages have springs opposed to eachother which makes the level design look dumb. In general, the time travel mechanic goes against how Sonic CD is designed.
The bosses are by far the worst and least challenging. The Metal Sonic race was nice on paper, but that level doesn't really flow nicely as well. I get that Sonic CD is more about exploration and finding posts and generators, and trust me its how I always play it, but the Metal Sonic race should've been more like it would end up to be in Generations.
Sonic CD ended up on a lot of GOAT shortlists and I can see why lots of gamers who tried it afterward are puzzled about this. Sonic CD is absolutely no patch on Sonic 2 but it being so radically different might save it somewhat. And the time travel mechanic is awesome (if it wasn't implemented so poorly).
Lord British
Member
It would be off topic for me to do another CD defence post, but I strongly disagree with you on a couple of things. I think your post is pretty reasonable on the whole despite not agreeing, but I will just add that the future posts are for checking out the Good and Bad future, which is pointless! But it's pointless flavour, in my view it adds to the game. It's a bit of aesthetic polish, and I love that they put in this thing that very few people will see.
I also disagree about the level design but I've gone on about that at length elsewhere.
Oyashrio-Sama
Member
I'm pretty glad to see I'm not alone with my dislike of Sonic CD. I love the idea of the Time Travel mechanic but I feel like the level weren't really designed for it.
Cindi Mayweather
Member
I don't really agree. By world 3 in SMB3 the game starts to get a bit tricky. For example in 3-2, it's best not to fall in the water at all. There's a moving platform, but the great thing about the level is how you can free style it. You can grab the stars and go invisible to make the fish just die when flying into you, or you could ignore the stars and use fire power and shoot them when they come in the air, or you maybe you want to ignore all of that entirely and just want jump on them and do regular platforming. Then there's 3-3 with the big fish. Assuming you don't have fire power, if you mess up and land in the water, there's a large possibility of being eaten by the fish. What I really like about Mario is how many options you've got. You can make it as hard or as easy as you want it to be. On 3-3, you don't have to use fire power if you don't want to.
You can see 3-3 here: https://youtu.be/61MNeKHnhe0?t=38m1s
3-4 is an interesting castle level maze.
What about 3-6?
https://youtu.be/61MNeKHnhe0?t=45m54s
Or 3-8? The big fish is back.
https://youtu.be/61MNeKHnhe0?t=51m21s
Mario has far more interesting platforming much sooner. Mind you, this is only world 3. World 2 is fun too. Mario has clouds and stuff, but not for long. In Mario there are far more consequences for your actions than compared to Sonic.
Do not mistake my argument as one being that Sonic is a bad game because it's easy. There are a lot of easy games I do not consider bad games. Final Fantasy VII is easy as hell and I think it's a classic.
Further more, I think Ducktales is still harder than Sonic. But that's besides the point, and I think Ducktales is the better game. Ducktales also has the benefit of multiple difficulty modes including a hard mode. Is also is more open in that you can pick stages in a specific order. That type of freedom appeals to me. Ducktales also has better boss fights, more interesting secrets (keys for instance). I don't think a single Sonic level is as good as the Moon.
Difficulty has nothing to do with Ducktales being a better game than Sonic The Hedgehog.
Bottomless pits work in Mario games because Nintendo uses them right. In the old 2D Mario games the screen rarely scrolled up, so when you encountered a bottomless pit you knew for sure what it was. Mario levels are way shorter than Sonic levels, and waaaay less complex and exploration focused. With the NSMB games Nintendo took great care in designing a dynamic camera that and using their superb level design skills to make bottomless pits very clear.
Sonic, on the other hand, makes strong use of vertically stacked levels, either from having tiered paths or from having levels wrap around. This makes bottomless pits essentially impossible even if they wanted them except on the lowest tier of the maps. So with Sonic, rather than instant death, you often get inconvenienced. You have to take a less fun path or you have to work your way back up again or you miss out on a secret. It still makes you strive to improve your skills because those things are as bad as dying.
Starting with the Adventure games Sonic started abusing bottomless pits. The 3D games became platforms and rails floating above bottomless pits and it just felt unfair combined with the awful cameras and controls. Dimps took things to a whole new level with their shitty level design because unlike older Sonic games and Mario games where bottomless pits were clearly defined by good level design and camera use Dimps would put pits all over the place that looked like alternate paths. The example that comes to mind the most is this one part in Sonic Rush's Night Carnival where there's a small pit behind a spring that looks like it might be an alternate path. If you jump down it you fall a few hundred feet and die. This led to fans complaining about the awful level design, and rather than fixing it they decided to do this:
Warning! Bad Level Design!
Sir_Crocodile
Member
They should put that symbol on the front of every sonic game dimps crapped out.
SkylineRKR
Member
From Dimps I only played Sonic Rush 1 on DS as I was told how good it was and how Sonic was finally back.
It was dog shit. Hold right, and jump over pitfall. Levels went on and on like this. The bosses had to be the worst ones in existence. I thought 'what am I not seeing?'. That game's level design was nowhere near the likes of say, Hydro City, Ice Cap or Flying Battery. Its just sad that such a game was considered good, said a lot about the perception of Sonic in general I think. Well I guess I also beat both Sonic 4 games and they were by Dimps as well. They were shit.
I think its just hard to create a good Sonic game. People hate the 3D games, people hate the focus on speed, people hate the exploration. The secret is that Sonic 2, and its 2 Genesis sequels offered just about enough of both. The levels weren't completely straightforward, but also not completely about exploration. There were speed zones, and then the pace dialed down. On top of that you could go slower and find secrets, or you could try to maintain to be at the highest tier of the level and be quick about it. Thats missing in later Sonic games who lost their verticality.
It was dog shit. Hold right, and jump over pitfall. Levels went on and on like this. The bosses had to be the worst ones in existence. I thought 'what am I not seeing?'. That game's level design was nowhere near the likes of say, Hydro City, Ice Cap or Flying Battery. Its just sad that such a game was considered good, said a lot about the perception of Sonic in general I think. Well I guess I also beat both Sonic 4 games and they were by Dimps as well. They were shit.
I think its just hard to create a good Sonic game. People hate the 3D games, people hate the focus on speed, people hate the exploration. The secret is that Sonic 2, and its 2 Genesis sequels offered just about enough of both. The levels weren't completely straightforward, but also not completely about exploration. There were speed zones, and then the pace dialed down. On top of that you could go slower and find secrets, or you could try to maintain to be at the highest tier of the level and be quick about it. Thats missing in later Sonic games who lost their verticality.
Cindi Mayweather
Member
Exactly my point.
But you seem to find just being inconvenienced as not too big a deal because it pushes you to get better. I think it shows that your actions rarely matter. And I can't say with a straight face that your actions not mattering makes a good game.
Also, I happen to sometimes prefer the low tier of Sonic levels depending on the stage.
Same story. Bought it on DS. Was doo doo.
Nintendoga
Member
Sonic 1 was always the weakest of the classics, level design just never flows for me. One zone you're running through the stage at a fast speed, next couple of zones you're slowly making your way through some tedious platforming shit.
Sonic 2, CD, and 3K tho? You gotta play em. When people talk about how good the old Sonic games are, those 3 are the reason why. Especially 3. Hell I'd even say 3K rivals Mario World with how goooood it is.
Stay away from Sonic 4. That shit ain't a classic.
Sonic 2, CD, and 3K tho? You gotta play em. When people talk about how good the old Sonic games are, those 3 are the reason why. Especially 3. Hell I'd even say 3K rivals Mario World with how goooood it is.
Stay away from Sonic 4. That shit ain't a classic.
Lord British
Member
Playing Sonic CD's stages from left to right, traditionally, is disconcerting if you've played a Sonic game before. The stages aren't really tailored for that sort of playstyle for two reasons.
1) To increase the challenge in Time Attack, which is all about replaying and finding the flow of a stage to shave down your best time and unlock extra features.
2) Because you're supposed to be exploring, time travelling and finding the generators/holograms, and getting the lay of the land to suss out the best spots for said time travel.
The game still gives you the option of traditional play - you can even get a Good Future if you collect all the Time Stones (beat every special stage). But it's not the optimum experience or necessarily the intended one.
1) To increase the challenge in Time Attack, which is all about replaying and finding the flow of a stage to shave down your best time and unlock extra features.
2) Because you're supposed to be exploring, time travelling and finding the generators/holograms, and getting the lay of the land to suss out the best spots for said time travel.
The game still gives you the option of traditional play - you can even get a Good Future if you collect all the Time Stones (beat every special stage). But it's not the optimum experience or necessarily the intended one.
SkylineRKR
Member
In Sonic CD, I usually did both. So I collected all gems and I destroyed all generators. I think it was a trophy on the PSN version, even.
And yeah, if you can collect the stones early on, you can go to the future and not be bothered by enemies. Which is a good reward for your hard work (and those damn hitboxes on ufos).
And yeah, if you can collect the stones early on, you can go to the future and not be bothered by enemies. Which is a good reward for your hard work (and those damn hitboxes on ufos).
Lord British
Member
Your actions matter constantly on a moment-to-moment basis in the same manner as almost any other comparable platformer. I think the difference between my perspective and yours on this matter is that I don't need to die a lot to feel like my actions have consequences.
I'm surprised you don't like Sonic Rush, it seems like almost exactly what you want - relatively uninterrupted speed and lots of bottomless pits.
The only issue here is if you collect all the Stones you can no longer locate the generators iirc. It's just a Good Future all around.
Sonic 1 is a bloody classic; the 16 bit Sonic games still have controls which are unique to this day. Is it flawed? Sure, but nowhere near how people are making out in this thread. All games are flawed, even classics.
I prefer it to Sonic 2, but 3&K for me is tied with Yoshi's Island as the greatest platformer of all time.
I prefer it to Sonic 2, but 3&K for me is tied with Yoshi's Island as the greatest platformer of all time.
Your actions matter. What you're doing is akin to saying that your actions don't matter because if you fall in a pit and die you respawn and get to try again.
Over-reliance on bottomless pits is bad game design. Both Mario and classic Sonic games use them smartly. And lives are an archaic system. Whether you die and start from a checkpoint or fall down and have to climb back up you're not getting past the challenging bit without proving your skill. In lieu of dying in Sonic you might miss secrets or more fun parts of a level, which in many ways can feel like a worse setback than losing a life.
Sonic Games are great (Ok 80% of them are shit, but that last ten percent...) Alot of people probably don't like them because they're hard. They are hard and aren't friendly games, not like Mario.
I made a post in the last one of these "da sonic is bad???" threads, but basically I really like Mario games, but they're very repetitive, easy games with terrible boss fights. Sonic has a more arcadey design, like SMB1 (while SMB3 and World don't), which rewards nuance and general familiarity with the game. There's also a ton of variety (making enemies unique to a stage, different types of non-repeated terrain tiles) as well as a big emphasis on boss fights. Sonic is about different things than Mario is, but that's because it's closer to Mario 1 in design than later Mario games are. (Yuji Naka said once that they got the idea for Sonic from everyone at Sega having fun trying to beat eachother's times in Mario 1)
I don't think anyone but speedrunners memorize the entire game, but most people who like the games kind of remember a vague amount of things about the levels. They're not casual friendly games for the most part, and usually your first playthrough is the worst, even on the good ones, but the nature of what makes the game fun to play (and come back to) is that thresh hold.
Playing 20 minutes of a sonic game one time isn't going to be that great because you won't really get used to the nuance of the physics and the way shit like rolling effects momentum. Some of the funnest things about the games comes in just doing a cool thing with your momentum.
Exploration's also fun too. Sonic CD and 3&K focus on that, and getting enough rings to get into a special stage is one of the funner, challenging aspects of Sonic 2, it makes the game feel more satisfying when you're focusing on protecting your 50 rings, it also means you're getting more lives and continues along the way, and then there's the satisfaction of blasting through the last couple zones as Super Sonic, feels good.
Sonic 1 has some problems and I actually went and tweaked the object placement in an editor to make it less of a pain in the ass (also moving Marble zone to zone 5) I might throw it on steam workshop I guess at some point and see if people like what I did with it. I still wanna tweak a few minor things tho. (I didn't change the level design really, only the object and trap placement to be more like the later games and make it more fun to play)
I made a post in the last one of these "da sonic is bad???" threads, but basically I really like Mario games, but they're very repetitive, easy games with terrible boss fights. Sonic has a more arcadey design, like SMB1 (while SMB3 and World don't), which rewards nuance and general familiarity with the game. There's also a ton of variety (making enemies unique to a stage, different types of non-repeated terrain tiles) as well as a big emphasis on boss fights. Sonic is about different things than Mario is, but that's because it's closer to Mario 1 in design than later Mario games are. (Yuji Naka said once that they got the idea for Sonic from everyone at Sega having fun trying to beat eachother's times in Mario 1)
I don't think anyone but speedrunners memorize the entire game, but most people who like the games kind of remember a vague amount of things about the levels. They're not casual friendly games for the most part, and usually your first playthrough is the worst, even on the good ones, but the nature of what makes the game fun to play (and come back to) is that thresh hold.
Playing 20 minutes of a sonic game one time isn't going to be that great because you won't really get used to the nuance of the physics and the way shit like rolling effects momentum. Some of the funnest things about the games comes in just doing a cool thing with your momentum.
Exploration's also fun too. Sonic CD and 3&K focus on that, and getting enough rings to get into a special stage is one of the funner, challenging aspects of Sonic 2, it makes the game feel more satisfying when you're focusing on protecting your 50 rings, it also means you're getting more lives and continues along the way, and then there's the satisfaction of blasting through the last couple zones as Super Sonic, feels good.
Sonic 1 has some problems and I actually went and tweaked the object placement in an editor to make it less of a pain in the ass (also moving Marble zone to zone 5) I might throw it on steam workshop I guess at some point and see if people like what I did with it. I still wanna tweak a few minor things tho. (I didn't change the level design really, only the object and trap placement to be more like the later games and make it more fun to play)
Lord British
Member
I contend that the early titles are supremely friendly, far more so than Mario, thanks to the simple controls and the Rings system. Anyone could play them and that's why they were huge.
Sonic Adventure fucked all that up with five disparate play styles. Point missed.
Sonic Adventure fucked all that up with five disparate play styles. Point missed.
cantona222
Member
You keep ignoring the context here. This would only be a design flaw in a traditional platformer like Mario, not in a Sonic game.
Traditional platformer = Start from point A and reach point B alive.
-> X type of level design and B type of obstacles
Sonic = Start from point A and reach point B by achieving the best possible score/time.
-> Y type of level design and Z type of obstacles
In a Sonic game, the lack of bottomless pits isn't a design flaw. It's good game design based on what the game is all about. If you fail in the "fast path" the game will punish you, not by killing you, but by throwing you in a path that will make you go slower and lose time. If you fail in the slowest possible path, then the game will punish you by death. Star Light Zone is a masterfully designed level and an excellent example of this approach.
Play Sonic Advance 2 and you'll immediately understand why bottomless pits have no place in Sonic games.
Sonic Chaos is floaty, Sonic Triple Trouble is floaty.
There's nothing floaty about Sonic's jump in the 16bit games.
SonicMegaDrive
Member
That's a really good video. While I don't necessarily agree with a lot of his points, I appreciate him for backing up his points without resorting to childishly calling the game "bad" or "shit". Oh, and he seems to have an excellent speaking voice. That counts for a lot in YT videos. I'll listen to almost any deep video game analysis as long as the speaker doesn't sound like a stuttering mouthbreather.
Clockwork5
Member
But Sonic 1 is actually a bad game. Uncharted is, at worst, kinda underwhelming at times.
Lord British
Member
[Citation needed]
Alex Kidd in the Enchanted Castle is a mediocre game.
Zool is a mediocre game.
Chuck Rock is a mediocre game.
Sonic the Hedgehog is significantly better than any of those games. Therefore...
SonicMegaDrive
Member
Don't forget Bubsy. That game wanted to be Sonic so bad, but without any of the understanding of what made Sonic work.
Darkstorne
Member
I don't think it's a bad game, but sure, it's the first game in a well established series, so of course it isn't the best. It had a great unique concept which the sequels built on and fleshed out with far superior level design.
Sonic 3 and Knuckles is one of the best platformers ever made imo. Ridiculous number of well designed levels, fantastic music, excellent art direction, immense replayability with the different characters and the chaos emeralds, and the save system to really top it all off as a huge game you can keep going back to. If you want to remember why the Genesis / Mega Drive Sonic games were so great, you know what you have to do:
Whenever this kinds of threads come up I feel like I live in opposite land. I grew up with Sonic and the Mega Drive, and every other kid I was friends with either had a Mega Drive or a Master System with the exception of one mate that had a SNES. We played tons of Mario All-Stars and Yoshi's Island at his house and loved them, but Sonic was on a whole other level of importance, especially when Sonic 3 and Sonic & Knuckles came out. We would talk about new discoveries in the games all the time, and hear rumours about a 'Super Tails' and 'Hyper Knuckles' and when one of my friends managed to unlock them everyone wanted to rush over and see. Sonic 3K in particular is special to me because of this.
I can't actually remember what my first Sonic game was, but I think it was Sonic 2. 2 was a big deal for me and friends because of the two player race mode. Sonic 1 was also played a lot but no as much as the other three main games. I also had a Mega CD and Sonic CD which I was obsessed with as the levels were so huge and complicated I would discover something new every time I played it. I don't think I ever managed to find every single past-fixer though.
Each game had a 'debug mode' cheat that let you place any object anywhere and I probably spent as much time if not more messing with that, learning how the game works and pushing it to its technical limits with sprite counts slowing the game down or glitching it out. Fun times haha.
Despite all of this obviously childhood-led bias, I don't feel like I have memorised every inch of every level of these games, but I get the flow of them if that makes any sense. There are some traps that still catch me out if I haven't played them for a while, and some enemy placements are pretty cheap (especially in Metropolis zone god-dam haha) but I never felt like I struggle with them, probably because I try not to rush through them and just hold right. The way the rolling, jumping, physics etc work just feel natural to me most of the time.
In comparison, mainly because I have never played them in full or for anywhere near as long I find that I am complete and utter crap at 2D mario games, and this includes mario maker. I'm always miss judging jumps, landing right in front of enemies or just missing a ledge, or slipping into a pit etc. I'm completely awful at them and its frustrating sometimes.
I do think what you grew up with makes a big difference. Mario and Sonic are such different games they may as well be a different sub-genre of platforming. Mario is about accurately, quick-reflexes and experimentation to find secrets, whereas Sonic is about flow, momentum and survival. I'm terrible at Mario games but I wouldn't go to say the are badly designed or anything, just that they don't suit my play style. Same for people that struggle with Sonic I guess, it just doesn't line up with how they approach platformers. *shrugs*
If I was to rate Sonic 1 I would say its the most traditional platformer-y of the lot, and obviously a bit slower. But I still have no problems with it: its a great game is a bit weirdly paced in places compared to later games which got the balance down much better. I would rate its level designs above Sonic CDs (which is fun to explore but a bit sloppy in places) but below Sonic 2 and 3K. I think there is a big reason why Sonic was such a hit when it came out ad it wasn't just because of the character himself or the marketing, or even just the music and visuals: it played quite unlike anything else before it and an amazing achievement for the time. No, its not as big or clever as Mario World or even SMB3, but it doesn't need or try to be.
I can't actually remember what my first Sonic game was, but I think it was Sonic 2. 2 was a big deal for me and friends because of the two player race mode. Sonic 1 was also played a lot but no as much as the other three main games. I also had a Mega CD and Sonic CD which I was obsessed with as the levels were so huge and complicated I would discover something new every time I played it. I don't think I ever managed to find every single past-fixer though.
Each game had a 'debug mode' cheat that let you place any object anywhere and I probably spent as much time if not more messing with that, learning how the game works and pushing it to its technical limits with sprite counts slowing the game down or glitching it out. Fun times haha.
Despite all of this obviously childhood-led bias, I don't feel like I have memorised every inch of every level of these games, but I get the flow of them if that makes any sense. There are some traps that still catch me out if I haven't played them for a while, and some enemy placements are pretty cheap (especially in Metropolis zone god-dam haha) but I never felt like I struggle with them, probably because I try not to rush through them and just hold right. The way the rolling, jumping, physics etc work just feel natural to me most of the time.
In comparison, mainly because I have never played them in full or for anywhere near as long I find that I am complete and utter crap at 2D mario games, and this includes mario maker. I'm always miss judging jumps, landing right in front of enemies or just missing a ledge, or slipping into a pit etc. I'm completely awful at them and its frustrating sometimes.
I do think what you grew up with makes a big difference. Mario and Sonic are such different games they may as well be a different sub-genre of platforming. Mario is about accurately, quick-reflexes and experimentation to find secrets, whereas Sonic is about flow, momentum and survival. I'm terrible at Mario games but I wouldn't go to say the are badly designed or anything, just that they don't suit my play style. Same for people that struggle with Sonic I guess, it just doesn't line up with how they approach platformers. *shrugs*
If I was to rate Sonic 1 I would say its the most traditional platformer-y of the lot, and obviously a bit slower. But I still have no problems with it: its a great game is a bit weirdly paced in places compared to later games which got the balance down much better. I would rate its level designs above Sonic CDs (which is fun to explore but a bit sloppy in places) but below Sonic 2 and 3K. I think there is a big reason why Sonic was such a hit when it came out ad it wasn't just because of the character himself or the marketing, or even just the music and visuals: it played quite unlike anything else before it and an amazing achievement for the time. No, its not as big or clever as Mario World or even SMB3, but it doesn't need or try to be.
Paul_Str337
Member
This is almost exactly my experience of living in the UK. SEGA were so ubiquitous here that Sonic was the number one game in the early 90''s, no question. Nintendo treated Europe like the third world while SEGA made it a focus so Mario got much less traction early on.
Kssio_Aug
Member
When I was a little child I loved to watch my father beating Sonic 2 in Master System, since then it became a very special game to me.
Later I got a Snes as gift and loved to play some Mario World, but 2 of my cousins had a Mega Drive and we always had a blast with Sonic 2 and 3.
Sonic was my favorite franchise back then.
Today I prefer Mario overall though, sadly Sonic didn't have such good sequences after Mega Drive. But in that time, it was a really, really great game!
Later I got a Snes as gift and loved to play some Mario World, but 2 of my cousins had a Mega Drive and we always had a blast with Sonic 2 and 3.
Sonic was my favorite franchise back then.
Today I prefer Mario overall though, sadly Sonic didn't have such good sequences after Mega Drive. But in that time, it was a really, really great game!