No bouncy quills here, and the head moves. (why I have the impression the tail is way too pointy and hard?)
The original classic sonic has solid spikes thats why, they were also thin like paper (sonic 2 rotation sprites show this) where in sonic 3+ his spikes became a solid set of 5 for the back of his head, 2 on his back and a tail. Moving on to the 3d games is when they truely gave his spines some flex, so the more modern design would make them move also imo.
That was just the 3D model they used for those sprites, Sonic's quills were never supposed to look like that. Just look at his sprite in Sonic 2's Special Stage...
Did they use a 3D model for sonic 2? I thought sonic 3 was the first time they used 3D to help make the sonic sprites.
Well, they used 3D models for other things, so it wouldn't be surprising if those were too. That would explain why Sonic and Tails look so odd only in that certain animation.
They used 3D for the Sonic2 spring animations. I remember reading that in Gamefan...or was it Gamepro?
<!--quoteo(post=279370:date=Feb 14 2009, 12:01 PM:name=STHX)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (STHX @ Feb 14 2009, 12:01 PM) (why I have the impression the tail is way too pointy and hard?)[/quote] Fuck, that is BEAUTIFUL. Brilliant work.
<!--quoteo(post=279370:date=Feb 14 2009, 12:01 PM:name=STHX)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (STHX @ Feb 14 2009, 12:01 PM) [/quote] Beautiful animation, but I think maybe his hands are too big? It clutters up the sprite.
Eyes' and ears' movement are not as smooth as the rest of the animation, which is gorgeous. Also Tonberry2k what the fuck, is Retro becoming the new Pixeltendo or anything? Fuck.
Somehow I didn't liked the animation of the feet. In some frames one foot seemed longer than the previous. I changed it a little. Also:
Any reason why he has a hunched back? =P Sorry about the black background, not too sure what program you're using with transparency.
He still looks better with his head shifted 1 pixel to the left, to be honest, it just fits the position of the rest of the original sprites better.
More than one. First - Does Sonic really needs 5 shades of blue? Every sprite posted here uses 5 shades of blue, but after comparing to the old sprites I noticed that none of them do this. If they managed to make a good looking sprite without all those blue, then why do we need them? The current "final" sprite, by the way, can easely get rid of one blue, considering how it is made. Second - Sonic is really blue? There is something wrong with the current palette. The main color is: Red: 16 Green: 88 Blue:212 Doesn't seem so blue to me. Sonic 1 sprite had a purpleish palette, but Sonic 2 and 3 ones hadn't, and they looked blue. Also, by getting rid of the unnecessary 5th blue, we gain a free color to our use (best use would probably be a darker red, since I don't understand why the shoes must have gray inside them). Third - Proportions Direct comparison of the current sprite proportions shows that it seems shorter than the past ones. Alone, this is not a problem, but if we take a look at the slow walking animation Chimpo posted some pages back we notice that, in that animation Sonic is taller than in his "final" sprite. Kinda weird, don't you think? Fourth - Retro feel No one has something to say against the classic sprites. Everyone likes them, just as everyone likes their games. The current "final" sprite doesn't blend well with the classic sprites. But why, exactly? Excluding the proportions and the palette, these things are wrong: Too bright, and is not really clear where the light source is Doesn't look forward Middle quill seems to be smaller, and it seems like it is behind the low quill, even if they shouldn't. Shine on rear shoe is too much on the left Fifth - No description needed. Animation on top tells all.
I have to admit that the colour of the other sprite does look more turquoise than blue. Oh and Sonic 3 does have a purplish shade.
