Support NeoGAF

[Nocturnowl]

Marble Garden's level design probably isn't as bad/bland as I remember (it's been a minute since I last played), but the music does absolutely nothing for me. Almost kills the zone outright imo. I have similar thoughts on Carnival Night, but again it's been a while.

The music is almost there but like hilltop in Sonic 2 it feels like the sound chip just can't deliver.

Spoiler

still love that goofy harmonica

Meanwhile Carnival Night's music...

But yeah, Mania is way more consistent as a whole from a level design standpoint.
I feel like the only thing that has me umming and ahhing about calling it the GOAT Sonic right now is similar to the issue games like NSMBU or A Link Between Worlds have, where it's like there's just a bit too much plucked from the past.

 

[James Scott]

"Needs some tweaking", more like "needs to be proven these people can actually design a level rather than a huge sandbox where you go around in very ugly Green Hill Zone where everything feels off because the proportions are all messed up".

Mania's great, but the Utopia "omg this is what Sonic in 3D needs to be" posts are some of the most baffling stuff that Sonic fans can come up with these days. They're not even at the start line there to deserve this mantle of "what Sonic needs to be" that often gets attached to the game.

I don't want the Sonic Utopia guys to make a Sonic 3D Mania or whatever, I want Sonic Team to learn from that and make an actual game.
It's a sandbox level and it's pretty fun for what it is, but I think the idea has a lot more potential than "Boost game for the 4th time, but now appeasing furries"

 

[The Xtortionist]

But yeah, Mania is way more consistent as a whole from a level design standpoint. I feel like the only thing that has me umming and ahhing about calling it the GOAT Sonic right now is similar to the issue games like NSMBU or A Link Between Worlds have, where it's like there's just a bit too much plucked from the past.

I mean, you're not wrong.

But please consider this

 

[forknknife]

http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?p=245182603#post245182603

Check the video in this thread i made, ir really makes you appreciate the 2d sonic franchise much more. I still think Mario games are perhaps the better games in general but Sonic Mania is certainly not that far behind and, in many regards (graphics, design, style, music) it definitely surpasses all of them.

 

[Nocturnowl]

I mean, you're not wrong.

But please consider this

Going for my weakness for stardust speedway, sneaky!

 

[Flousn]

Sonic Mania is my first real contact with 2D Sonic games. I can absolutely relate to the "wanting to see everything in one go"-sentiment. I fear i am still in that phase, because i just can´t really enjoy playing the levels for the first time due to the feeling of having little control over the progression. But i love replaying them and getting to know the different routes (as for now, just in time attack because i am yet to complete the game).
Frankly, i am a bit frustrated with myself for not being able to just go with the flow of the stage and still getting slighty annoyed when i accidentially step on a boost pad and see 5 alterantive routes fly by.

 

[Neiteio]

Sonic Mania is my first real contact with 2D Sonic games. I can absolutely relate to the "wanting to see everything in one go"-sentiment. I fear i am still in that phase, because i just can´t really enjoy playing the levels for the first time due to the feeling of having little control over the progression. But i love replaying them and getting to know the different routes (as for now, just in time attack because i am yet to complete the game).
Frankly, i am a bit frustrated with myself for not being able to just go with the flow of the stage and still getting slighty annoyed when i accidentially step on a boost pad and see 5 alterantive routes fly by.

Think of it like going straight for the summit in Bob-omb Battlefield in Super Mario 64. You don't necessarily take the time to free the Chain Chomp or investigate the floating island or search out the red coins or teleport between the flowerbeds on the first visit to the Big Bob-omb. Likewise here, it's perfectly valid to blaze a trail through Sonic's sprawling playgrounds to the end, and to come back later to see their other attractions.

 

[The Hermit]

Yup Neiteio, you got it.

Now go play 1 to 3&k.

 

[Camjo-Z]

nor does it feel like Mario

2D Sonic criticism in a nutshell.

 

[Neff]

Sonic's always been Sonic, nothing's really changed.

I wouldn't rate Mania over 1 or 2, but it's on par with 3 and definitely better than S&K.

 

[flak57]

i mean sure, it's all subjective

but that recent thread shows a lot of people feel the game design is too at odds with itself, hurling you forward and then stopping you suddenly (and randomly). never feels good to explore, nor does it feel like Mario when you are quickly and carefully zipping through the level.

You're zipping along and then stopping and waiting suddenly all the time in a game like Mario World.

?

 

[Flousn]

You're zipping along and then stopping and waiting suddenly all the time in a game like Mario World.

What irks me ist that you only can kill enemies when you are spinning, instead of any kind of jump on the head. It might seem like a small thing, but in Mario-Games, you can start jumping-off-enemy-strings from any sort of jump/launchpad/whatever.
Of course, that is probably mainly my inexperience with classic Sonic, as i am still fighting my conditioning of always trying to land on an enemy - so my view on the matter might change after a while.

 

[nynt9]

If you like it, I also recommend Freedom Planet. That was the game that made me go "wait, it's not the sonic formula that's bad, it's that the implementation of the formula so far has been bad". I know this is controversial, but FP and Mania are the only times I've enjoyed a Sonic game. They just feel more consistently designed and fair. The widescreen really helps as well. Overall I thought FP felt fresher too because they have their own gimmicks and huge levels. So if you like Mania I recommend it heavily.

 

[flak57]

What irks me ist that you only can kill enemies when you are spinning, instead of any kind of jump on the head. It might seem like a small thing, but in Mario-Games, you can start jumping-off-enemy-strings from any sort of jump/launchpad/whatever.
Of course, that is probably mainly my inexperience with classic Sonic, as i am still fighting my conditioning of always trying to land on an enemy - so my view on the matter might change after a while.

Sonic spins when he jumps, you can jump on or into enemies to kill them, depending on the enemy of course.

 

[The Third Heat]

I hope Mania can change my mind about Sonic. I've always admired the 2D Sonic games, but as a kid who grew up with Nintendo, I never really dug deep into them. I don't think they're bad games, but they never clicked for me like Mario/DKC. I hope to pick up Mania eventually because the hype is too much to ignore, so we'll see if it can change my mind. I hope so.

Perfection. Utopia is just so god damn good. Want a full game like it sooooo bad.

This game looks amazing and really makes me hope someday for a more open-world, à la Banjo-Kazooie style Sonic game, where there's perhaps a beginning and an end to each world/level, but loads of different ways to get there and also challenges to do and hidden things to find. This to me feels like an evolution of the 2D Sonic idea, where there's more than one way to get to the end, but expanded to enhance replay-ability of each level.

But it could also be a bad idea that's been done before. I'm pretty ignorant to all 3D Sonic games past Sonic Adventure 2.

 

[Flousn]

Sonic spins when he jumps, you can jump on or into enemies to kill them, depending on the enemy of course.

Yeah, if I jump, but if you get launched through the air, you usually don't spin. And as of now, my platform-instincts kick in and I instinctively try to land on top of enemies. As I said, probably just takes some time getting used to it.

 

[flak57]

Yeah, if I jump, but if you get launched through the air, you usually don't spin. And as of now, my platform-instincts kick in and I instinctively try to land on top of enemies. As I said, probably just takes some time getting used to it.

Ah, gotcha

 

[The Wart]

You're zipping along and then stopping and waiting suddenly all the time in a game like Mario World.

?

The difference is that in Mario you are always in control. Speed is a strategic choice you make. In Sonic, speed is something the level does to you, and you are moving too fast and the screen is too zoomed in for the player have much of any idea of what is going on. It's an interesting design philosophy, and as someone in another thread brought up, it has a lot in common with pinball.

Also, Mario is perfectly mobile and capable even starting from a dead stop. Sonic is often awkward an unwieldy, especially when you get stuck on a slope. The spin dash is a hack to get around this, but it's a weird mechanic that grinds the action to a literal halt before catapulting you into speeds that are basically impossible to control. It feels like a band-aid over a design flaw.

Sonic is interesting and I certainly enjoyed the classic Genisis games back in my halcyon days of youth. But I think 2D Mario is ultimately better designed.

If you like it, I also recommend Freedom Planet. That was the game that made me go "wait, it's not the sonic formula that's bad, it's that the implementation of the formula so far has been bad". I know this is controversial, but FP and Mania are the only times I've enjoyed a Sonic game. They just feel more consistently designed and fair. The widescreen really helps as well. Overall I thought FP felt fresher too because they have their own gimmicks and huge levels. So if you like Mania I recommend it heavily.

That's interesting because I thought Freedom Planet controlled terribly. It felt floaty and sluggish at the same time. Maybe I should give it another shot.

 

[Pachinko]

There has been a decent movement as of late to discount sonic as "never being good " and well ... I disagree. Certainly the blue blur was 70% marketing and 30% actual good game back in the 90's but 26 years removed from that marketing - I still find the genesis games are mostly fun to play.

They have broken aspects for sure and even some bugs but nothing is quite as much fun as getting a good lap going in sonic 2. And that's how I always viewed a sonic stage - a lap on a race track / obstacle course. OPs description of the glorious auto loop pretty much hits the nail on the head.

This is also why I find sonic CD a bit off , the level design doesn't complement the gameplay , it's to easy to get lost and instead of being traps , springs are just everywhere.

Mania is pretty great so far though , seems to take a fair bit from sonic 2's level design which is a good thing.

 

[Elfforkusu]

Nice OP, OP! I think that Sonic's design philosophy being so different from Mario's tends to turn people off when it wouldn't in a vacuum. You are supposed to be a little out of control. You're supposed to have to react to things you can't see ahead of time. There's a subtle tension that punctuates the speed, a danger that makes recognizing the warning signs ("I should slow down", or "I should roll", or "I should jump") all the more satisfying when it happens.

Sometimes they troll you by putting smashy obstacles that OHKO you after a fast section, but good Sonic levels are usually judicious about that sort of thing.

Also, this reply really resonates with me:

After playing Mario Galaxy recently, I was thinking something similar. I like 2D Mario, but I've rarely loved it in the same way I love classic 2D Sonic or 3D Mario. And I think a major part of that is how 2D Mario lacks the same kind of distinct imaginative worlds (Yoshi's Island is a clear exception, of course). Obstacles are often designed to be as generic as possible so they can be placed in a variety of different settings. World themes are cliches and the individual levels rarely expand those cliches. The same themes and gimmicks appear again and again between worlds and between games.

This leads to consistency with few outright bad levels, but it also means that few levels ever stand out. Just as a challenge, try naming your favorite 2D Mario levels. It's hard. The good ones often end up blurring together together.

In contrast, 3D Mario and 2D Sonic tend to emphasize how unique each level is, with new gimmicks and music and environments. And the best levels are huge and full of stuff to find. This leads to a few terrible levels, but the best levels are incredibly memorable. Try naming your favorite 2D Sonic or 3D Mario level. It's a hell of a lot easier, isn't it? You can probably even remember the music.

I don't think you could ever make a decent 3D Mario Maker or a decent 2D Sonic Maker, because the levels in these games aren't just obstacle courses you complete once or twice, they're lively worlds. And that means a lot.

 

[LiveFromKyoto]

Second, rather than thinking of Sonic and friends as characters who "gotta go fast," I've come to think of them as characters who generally take things slow, but who can use their speed to reach different parts of the level.

Next you'll think deeper about that and reach Stage 3 Realization, where you think about how the character and his physics are designed and you realize that actually, these games are kind of seriously flawed.

 

[Brandon F]

Next you'll think deeper about that and reach Stage 3 Realization, where you think about how the character and his physics are designed and you realize that actually, these games are kind of seriously flawed.

I'm waiting for RE6 defenders to reach Stage 3 Realization...

 

[Outtrigger888]

Mania made me remember why I liked sonic, I seriously forgot why I even enjoyed the genesis games. I love when a route doesn't go your way and you fling off into another challenge or slope, and the game keeps moving.

 

[The Wart]

After playing Mario Galaxy recently, I was thinking something similar. I like 2D Mario, but I've rarely loved it in the same way I love classic 2D Sonic or 3D Mario. And I think a major part of that is how 2D Mario lacks the same kind of distinct imaginative worlds (Yoshi's Island is a clear exception, of course). Obstacles are often designed to be as generic as possible so they can be placed in a variety of different settings. World themes are cliches and the individual levels rarely expand those cliches. The same themes and gimmicks appear again and again between worlds and between games.

Er, if you don't think levels in 2D Mario games have unique gimmicks and one-off mechanics then I think you maybe haven't played any other than the original...

 

[Camjo-Z]

Next you'll think deeper about that and reach Stage 3 Realization, where you think about how the character and his physics are designed and you realize that actually, these games are kind of seriously flawed.

Let me guess, you're the type of player who runs through speedy sections instead of rolling and then complains about how hazards you can't react to come out of nowhere.

 

[Neiteio]

I'm waiting for RE6 defenders to reach Stage 3 Realization...

OP here. RE6 is incredible when you know how to play it.

 

[OmegaDL50]

i mean sure, it's all subjective

but that recent thread shows a lot of people feel the game design is too at odds with itself, hurling you forward and then stopping you suddenly (and randomly). never feels good to explore, nor does it feel like Mario when you are quickly and carefully zipping through the level.

I think there is a point somewhere in here that when playing a Sonic game, one shouldn't expect the game to play like Mario or feel as one. Just like I wouldn't expect any other distinctive platform with it's own unique style to play like something else.

This applies to Kirby, DKC, Rayman, Yoshi's Island, AND especially Sonic no less. I wouldn't expect Sonic to feel like a Mario game, just the same I don't play Kirby expecting it to play like another sort of platformer.

Perhaps you are expecting something different out of Sonic in general are becoming disappointed in the fact that Sonic isn't what you are expecting it to be based on this preconceived notion.

 

[LiveFromKyoto]

Let me guess, you're the type of player who runs through speedy sections instead of rolling and then complains about how hazards you can't react to come out of nowhere.

Nope. It's more like, when people say "you silly rubes, you're not supposed to run through! The game's not really about speed, even though that's what the game, the character, and every piece of media surrounding it tell you. No no, it's about slow exploration!"

...then I'm like so why does the character grind to a halt and punish you when you drop speed? "We've designed a game about slow exploration with a character who crawls when moving from stop." Genius.

There isn't a master "a-ha!" key to Sonic's design. They just fucked up certain core elements and people liked the character, art and bouncy gimmicks enough to look past it.

 

[Toxi]

Er, if you don't think levels in 2D Mario games have unique gimmicks and one-off mechanics then I think you maybe haven't played any other than the original...

I mean, I've played original, SMB3, SMWorld, New Super Mario Bros, NSMB Wii, and NSMB 2. Also Yoshi's Island, but that barely counts.

Level specific gimmicks tend to be agnostic to the environment they're placed in and ultimately not individually memorable. The gimmicks that are specific to a certain kind of environment will be featured in virtually every stage of that environment, so stuff like lava castle stages ultimately begins to blend together because you keep seeing the same Bowser bridge, Dry Bones, rotating fire bars, tower climbs, etc.

Again, think of how easy it is to name your favorite 3D Mario or 2D Sonic levels. Then think about how easy it is to name your favorite 2D Mario levels.

 

[Sami+]

After playing Mario Galaxy recently, I was thinking something similar. I like 2D Mario, but I've rarely loved it in the same way I love classic 2D Sonic or 3D Mario. And I think a major part of that is how 2D Mario lacks the same kind of distinct imaginative worlds (Yoshi's Island is a clear exception, of course). Obstacles are often designed to be as generic as possible so they can be placed in a variety of different settings. World themes are cliches and the individual levels rarely expand those cliches. The same themes and gimmicks appear again and again between worlds and between games.

This leads to consistency with few outright bad levels, but it also means that few levels ever stand out. Just as a challenge, try naming your favorite 2D Mario levels. It's hard. The good ones often end up blurring together together.

In contrast, 3D Mario and 2D Sonic tend to emphasize how unique each level is, with new gimmicks and music and environments. And the best levels are huge and full of stuff to find. This leads to a few terrible levels, but the best levels are incredibly memorable. Try naming your favorite 2D Sonic or 3D Mario level. It's a hell of a lot easier, isn't it? You can probably even remember the music.

I don't think you could ever make a decent 3D Mario Maker or a decent 2D Sonic Maker, because the levels in these games aren't just obstacle courses you complete once or twice, they're lively worlds. And that means a lot.

What's interesting is that it almost feels like a role reversal. I can still have a lot of fun with the Boost formula (I LOVED it five years ago but played it to death and find it a bit played out now) but at the end of the day even with the individual level gimmicks, visuals aside each stage feels very similar. There are some that deviate from the norm- Seaside Hill does that well, Planet Wisp really doesn't. But it's a more "obstacle-course" feeling design by default.

 

[FSLink]

Nope. It's more like, when people say "you silly rubes, you're not supposed to run through! The game's not really about speed, even though that's what the game, the character, and every piece of media surrounding it tell you. No no, it's about slow exploration!"

...then I'm like so why does the character grind to a halt and punish you when you drop speed? "We've designed a game about slow exploration with a character who crawls when moving from stop." Genius.

There isn't a master "a-ha!" key to Sonic's design. They just fucked up certain core elements and people liked the character, art and bouncy gimmicks enough to look past it.

Uh, nah. I feel like speed and the spectacle of speed is the reward for mastery of the levels in Sonic. If you choose to go slower you can find secrets, but on later playthroughs you should be able to "go fast" and hit those key points on the way to the end of the level.

 

[Guess Who]

Nope. It's more like, when people say "you silly rubes, you're not supposed to run through! The game's not really about speed, even though that's what the game, the character, and every piece of media surrounding it tell you. No no, it's about slow exploration!"

...then I'm like so why does the character grind to a halt and punish you when you drop speed? "We've designed a game about slow exploration with a character who crawls when moving from stop." Genius.

There isn't a master "a-ha!" key to Sonic's design. They just fucked up certain core elements and people liked the character, art and bouncy gimmicks enough to look past it.

Yes, the game is about speed. No, the game is not about expecting you to go fast and nail everything the first time through. That's the distinction. You will fuck up and hit things and run into walls your first time through and that's okay. Sonic games are extremely forgiving in this sense, where it's very hard to actually die unless you get crushed or fall in a pit.

Sonic games are made to be replayed. When people say Sonic is about exploration, it's about playing the level multiple different times to find the best routes through the level. It's about learning where the enemies are, and how you can avoid hitting them or even use them, and how to manipulate the terrain and physics just right so that you can keep your speed up. Sonic Mania levels are huge and layered such that the first route you take on your first run is almost certainly not the best one.

Being able to get through a level quickly and efficiently while looking cool and nailing tricky jumps is something you will do over time, and not always doing that on your first playthrough is not some fatal ~design flaw~.

(It is honestly very tiring having to explain this over and over again.)

 

[Wozman23]

Second, rather than thinking of Sonic and friends as characters who "gotta go fast," I've come to think of them as characters who generally take things slow, but who can use their speed to reach different parts of the level. In other words, I focused on light exploration first, finding what I could, followed by selective uses of speed to, say, reach the top of a steep incline, or to navigate the loops and corkscrews that connect different parts of the level.

I always felt like the "gotta go fast" mantra was silly. I played the original Genesis versions taking my time, playing them very similar to how I play Mario. There were moments of quickness, that gave the game a cinematic feel, but I'd always slow things back down when possible.

At a certain point, and definitely when they went to 3D, Sonic games seemed too focused on "going fast" and they suffered for it. There are games that manage to execute on the "gotta go fast" logic - Velocity 2x for instance - but I don't believe Sonic has ever executed it well.

Because of the franchises missteps, I really haven't paid any mind to Mania, and never tried the Sonic 4 episodes, but maybe I need to give the franchise a look again.

 

[Big One]

Nope. It's more like, when people say "you silly rubes, you're not supposed to run through! The game's not really about speed, even though that's what the game, the character, and every piece of media surrounding it tell you. No no, it's about slow exploration!"

...then I'm like so why does the character grind to a halt and punish you when you drop speed? "We've designed a game about slow exploration with a character who crawls when moving from stop." Genius.

There isn't a master "a-ha!" key to Sonic's design. They just fucked up certain core elements and people liked the character, art and bouncy gimmicks enough to look past it.

I mean every hazard in the game can easily be seen ahead of time. None of them are outright cheap and if they are, it's in an area you're already slowing down in anyway (most of the time the spikes that come in and out of the ground can be seen ahead of time for example because they're placed in areas you're walking slow in anyway like tight corridors). The only things that tend to be somewhat "cheap" are the springs and other things that cause Sonic to bounce on things, but those rarely plunge to you losing control in a negative way. And considering how forgiving the game is when it comes to you actually dying due to the ring system, it can somewhat get away with cheap shots here-and-there without forcing you to start from scratch.

 

[Toxi]

On a side note, I also feel like there is very little critical discussion about 2D Mario levels besides 1-1. What makes a good Mario level? What makes a bad one? Nobody fucking talks about it, even when we do for other 2D platformers like Donkey Kong Country or Sonic or Mega Man.

What's interesting is that it almost feels like a role reversal. I can still have a lot of fun with the Boost formula (I LOVED it five years ago but played it to death and find it a bit played out now) but at the end of the day even with the individual level gimmicks, visuals aside each stage feels very similar. There are some that deviate from the norm- Seaside Hill does that well, Planet Wisp really doesn't. But it's a more "obstacle-course" feeling design by default.

Definitely. It's part of why I don't really enjoy the boost games as much.

 

[Camjo-Z]

Nope. It's more like, when people say "you silly rubes, you're not supposed to run through! The game's not really about speed, even though that's what the game, the character, and every piece of media surrounding it tell you. No no, it's about slow exploration!"

...then I'm like so why does the character grind to a halt and punish you when you drop speed? "We've designed a game about slow exploration with a character who crawls when moving from stop." Genius.

Ignoring the fact that very few people would argue Sonic is about slow exploration, the character doesn't grind to a halt when you drop speed. You have the spin dash which instantly gets you back up to speed.

"But that's too slow! You have to stand still to use it and Sonic is all about speed (at least that's what the Sonic X theme song told me) so HE CAN NEVER STAND STILL!"

They added the Drop Dash in Mania just for you. Now you don't even have to wait around to use the spin dash, you can just start moving forward with a jump and gain a burst of speed when you hit the ground.

 

[ckaneo]

Nope. It's more like, when people say "you silly rubes, you're not supposed to run through! The game's not really about speed, even though that's what the game, the character, and every piece of media surrounding it tell you. No no, it's about slow exploration!"

...then I'm like so why does the character grind to a halt and punish you when you drop speed? "We've designed a game about slow exploration with a character who crawls when moving from stop." Genius.

There isn't a master "a-ha!" key to Sonic's design. They just fucked up certain core elements and people liked the character, art and bouncy gimmicks enough to look past it.

This is so silly. The game is about getting to the end of the level, different games do this differently. The idea that because the character is fast it means run right into everything is dumber than the narrative you are trying to paint the game as. Also the "media"? The media tells you how to beat or play a game? How silly. I saw Sonic running in a commercial so that means obviously I can run into every obstacle right? Does that make sense?

The games arent about slow exploration. The games are literally about getting to the end of the level. It's not a difficult concept to understand unless you dont want to understand it.

 

[nded]

Because of the franchises missteps, I really haven't paid any mind to Mania, and never tried the Sonic 4 episodes, but maybe I need to give the franchise a look again.

Stay away from Sonic 4.

 

[OrbitalBeard]

The only frustrating part about Sonic Mania is trying to rank the levels. Even figuring out my favorite zone is difficult, because I pretty much love them all.

I -think- Studiopolis is my favorite, but ask me again tomorrow and I might have a different answer!

My personal favorite is

Spoiler

Metallic Madness

but Studiopolis is probably Sonic the Hedgehog at its absolute best. This zone almost perfectly encapsulates the essence of the 2D Sonic series and because of that, I think it may be the single best zone in the entire franchise. It's pure, unadulterated, 2D video game platforming bliss and is the type of experience that made me fall in love with this hobby in the first place.

I'm completely over the moon for Sonic Mania. It's one of the best gaming experiences I've had this generation, easily.

 

[MDave]

Yes, the game is about speed. No, the game is not about expecting you to go fast and nail everything the first time through. That's the distinction. You will fuck up and hit things and run into walls your first time through and that's okay. Sonic games are extremely forgiving in this sense, where it's very hard to actually die unless you get crushed or fall in a pit.

Sonic games are made to be replayed. When people say Sonic is about exploration, it's about playing the level multiple different times to find the best routes through the level. It's about learning where the enemies are, and how you can avoid hitting them or even use them, and how to manipulate the terrain and physics just right so that you can keep your speed up. Sonic Mania levels are huge and layered such that the first route you take on your first run is almost certainly not the best one.

Being able to get through a level quickly and efficiently while looking cool and nailing tricky jumps is something you will do over time, and not always doing that on your first playthrough is not some fatal ~design flaw~.

(It is honestly very tiring having to explain this over and over again.)

Bingo. OP explained this too.

Don't try to play Sonic like 2D Mario as the levels in those games don't often feature multiple paths. It's designed obstacle course style for single play throughs where you can get everything in one play, but Sonic is designed for multiple plays. You will never take the same route in Stardust Speedway accidentlty unless your trying too.

You keep going, keep moving forward. So what you passed a monitor you might have been able to get, there will be many chances later on. Levels are huge!

It's okay to let Sonic run or roll down a long slope, into loops. No point going backwards. You embrace the inertia and momentum of these moments, using the ball physics to get where you want.

You control the level to get where you want to go.

The more you play Sonic the more the physics 'click' then you can do what you want and go where you want in subsequent play throughs.

It's at this point that Sonic is a joy to play and replay.

 

[ckaneo]

Also how does the media make people think Sonic is good. I've never seen a 2D sonic game commercial in my life. I've barely seen a 3D one.

Why is it people use arguments like that and then pretend as if they are arguing "logical" game flaws.

 

[Mr. Patch]

Nope. It's more like, when people say "you silly rubes, you're not supposed to run through! The game's not really about speed, even though that's what the game, the character, and every piece of media surrounding it tell you. No no, it's about slow exploration!"

...then I'm like so why does the character grind to a halt and punish you when you drop speed? "We've designed a game about slow exploration with a character who crawls when moving from stop." Genius.

There isn't a master "a-ha!" key to Sonic's design. They just fucked up certain core elements and people liked the character, art and bouncy gimmicks enough to look past it.

You are not going to blaze through the game on your first playthrough. If you want to go fast, learn the game.

 

[javac]

I've played about 2 hours of this game and I don't get it at all, the style and music is amazing but the game itself is absolute garbage. I used to play sonic on the mega drive when I was a kid and I man I have no idea what the hell is going on. I'm going to give it some more tries but so far...

 

[Big One]

Also how does the media make people think Sonic is good. I've never seen a 2D sonic game commercial in my life. I've barely seen a 3D one.

Why is it people use arguments like that and then pretend as if they are arguing "logical" game flaws.

There's a prevailing trend on the internet that is convinced that Sonic was never good, which is complete BS. There's a reason why Sonic is the only character in video game history to ever compete with Mario, even solely helping the Genesis taking some of Nintendo's share of the market. Sonic is fresh, exciting, well designed, and solidified itself in gaming canon as an example of a platformer that can compete with Mario while doing something completely different from it. No other franchise has ever been able to reach up to that level. There's been some good ones like Rayman, Crash, Spyro, etc. but none of them never got near the level of success Mario and Sonic got.

 

[Professor Beef]

Also how does the media make people think Sonic is good. I've never seen a 2D sonic game commercial in my life. I've barely seen a 3D one.

Why is it people use arguments like that and then pretend as if they are arguing "logical" game flaws.

Not only that, but people parrot the "GOTTA GO FAST" line as if that's something that was in the marketing for the games, which it never fucking was. There's not a clearer example of revisionist history than that.

 

[goldenpp72]

There's a prevailing trend on the internet that is convinced that Sonic was never good, which is complete BS. There's a reason why Sonic is the only character in video game history to ever compete with Mario, even solely helping the Genesis taking some of Nintendo's share of the market. Sonic is fresh, exciting, well designed, and solidified itself in gaming canon as an example of a platformer that can compete with Mario while doing something completely different from it. No other franchise has ever been able to reach up to that level. There's been some good ones like Rayman, Crash, Spyro, etc. but none of them never got near the level of success Mario and Sonic got.

While Crash never became as iconic, the games typically sold quite similarly if not better when not factoring bundles. Sonic was a big deal from 1 to 2 but was largely bundled with systems, but Sonic 3 and beyond, never really sold more or as much as Crash did to my understanding.

DK, Mario, Crash, Sonic, are all pretty huge juggernauts of the genre.

 

[Big One]

While Crash never became as iconic, the games typically sold quite similarly if not better when not factoring bundles. Sonic was a big deal from 1 to 2 but was largely bundled with systems, but Sonic 3 and beyond, never really sold more or as much as Crash did to my understanding.

DK, Mario, Crash, Sonic, are all pretty huge juggernauts of the genre.

Sonic transcended the video games, though. There was literally TWO cartoons running at the same time in the 90's, a long running comic book, the works, It was a monster. Crash had nothing on that.

 

[MDave]

I've played about 2 hours of this game and I don't get it at all, the style and music is amazing but the game itself is absolute garbage. I used to play sonic on the mega drive when I was a kid and I man I have no idea what the hell is going on. I'm going to give it some more tries but so far...

the game itself is absolute garbage

I have no idea what the hell is going on

Problem right here.

It's like playing a RTS game for the first time and calling it garbage there is playing it, and then there is playing it.

 

[bomma_man]

I've always felt the same as OP I might give this a go one day (when it's on sale).

Fixed. What kinda nonsense was that?!

It's good to know that all the reviews are wrong. What other reviews are incorrect?

Alternatively, if you meant that you just dislike the games, why didn't you say that instead?

Christ this is the most boring argument ever. It's obvious what they meant.

 

[goldenpp72]

Sonic transcended the video games, though. There was literally TWO cartoons running at the same time in the 90's, a long running comic book, the works, It was a monster. Crash had nothing on that.

Oh definitely, just a lot of that was manufactured hype and advertisement vs something people literally loved I imagine. Sega did a masterful job of pushing Sonic, but it also kind of had nothing else that mattered to the public, even to this day they struggle to make anything iconic outside of Sonic to the masses. I say this as a huge huge Sega fan, it's just a shame.

If you ask people who Sonic is, they probably know, but if you ask gamers about actually wanting to play a series, Sonic isn't particularly bigger than Crash in that sense. More iconic, but comparably relevant in the sales department.