Sonic Superstars: A New 2D Sonic Game (Fall 2023)

There's a Sonic 4?

 

As we all imagined it!

 

It's undeniably a true classic Sonic game, even if it isn't the best example of one. The same cannot be said for Sonic 4, and that I'm not willing to debate on lmao

 

But the overarching point was about Sonic 1. Also I don't get it. They didn't try what again, exactly? They did try making Sonic games again, multiple times, using largely the same core ideas. When you're 30 years removed from the scene, it may not seem like it. But I think it was Scarred Sun that once said the discourse in 1994 BBS ervers was about how Sonic 3 was basically the same as the other two., and I'm pretty sure reviews talked about that too. The perception changes, but I don't think it's in any way fair to say "they didn't try Sonic 1 again".

 

Learning how to play Sonic 1 fast without a spindash was important for helping me understand how the classic games in general function.

 

I think a big problem nowadays is a lot of people think Sonic is a mix of speed and exploration when those are just two parts of Sonic. I should really write a whole thread about the other key aspects of Sonic, such as resource management and the goal of survival.

 

They built on Sonic 1's ideas while never going back to having entire levels focused on traditional platforming.

I don't see how hard it is to understand that's what I meant when I said "they never tried it again". 2 and CD both avoid traditional platforming focused levels because both teams, even with all the differences in philosophy between both games, decided that doesn't work for Sonic.

Also they spend 6 months on Green Hill Zone alone. A level that focuses heavily on freedom and exploration. The two things CD and 2 would dedicate themselves to fully, in different ways. That was what the team wanted to make.

Yes they did "run out of time" because if they could I bet they would have spent a lot of time on every single level. The traditional platforming levels are great but 2 and CD BOTH show that to the team, they were a compromise.

 

Also this is simply counterfactual. Reports say CD levels are, or at least were, divided between "speed" and "technical" levels, even though R2 may have been axed for this very reason (who knows). And I mean. Tidal Tempest and Metallic Madness are all fairly focused on platforming. Arguably, Mystic Cave too. I'm not sure you remember the games you're talking about very well. You may say the ratio changed, but to say they avoided them altogether is... just not true? Whether you like them or not is irrelevant to the fact that they exist.

Not to mention, what exactly does "traditional platforming" even entail to you? Last I checked a game can have traditional platforming (as in, moving between platforms with precision being a major factor in your success), freedom (as in multiple paths and ability to backtrack) and exploration (as in multiple goals besides the main one).

 

How about this. I don't like CD all too much and don't wish to discuss either any further. I never did. I don't care about CD level design. I think CD has horrible level design and don't care to analyze it.

Nothing I said is wrong. They objectively spent a lot of time on Green Hill Zone that they couldn't give to the other levels. Objectively Sonic 2 and CD were more about freedom. Objectively most 2D Sonic games take more from the Sonic 2 approach than they do Sonic 1.

Sonic 1 setting the foundation doesn't change the fact that objectively most games after it take their approach from Sonic 2's level design, that does NOT focus on traditional platforming, and not Sonic 1.

Hope we have come to an understanding. If not then I never asked to argue about this in the first place so I don't care.

 

So you come in here, with all confidence Gdd gave you, say something you can't back up, are shown evidence of the opposite and refuse to discuss how wrong are your assumptions because you don't like the game?

And your best bet is to say things you're talking about are "objective", when they a) aren't objective b) may not be due to the reason you stated? For instance, have you considered they spent more time working on Green Hill because it's the first level, and devs typically work more n their first level? You say "most 2D Sonic games take more from Sonic 2", but (discounting how debatable that is, or how much sense it makes to even argue this) that's like. Two games. Then the same team never made a 2D Sonic game again.

You're struggling here. You need to come up with something.

 

I have no idea why "I don't want to talk about this and never did, please leave me alone." isn't enough for you but now I feel the need to defend myself.

1. I wasn't trying to tear down CD. The first post you responded to was me trying to praise something about CD, the openness of the level design and focus on exploration. If you feel the game doesn't focus on that then cool, I take back that compliment.

2. "The game's programmer,Yuji Naka, stated that it took him almost a year to create Green Hill and that it was created and destroyed multiple times before arriving at the final version. - Wikipedia.

To me this implies the amount of work put into this level, and making it what it was, is because this was the games first impression and was supposed to indicate what the game is supposed to represent.

To me the fact that Sonic 2 focused more on open level design that feel more like Green Hill and Starlight Zone than Marble and Labyrinth showed that Naka felt ever focusing on slower levels with heavy focus on using Sonic for stages with slower traditional platforming was a mistake and he never went down that route again.

3. 3nk, Mania, and Superstars follow Sonic 2's approach to level design. They are predominately speed focused with slower platforming sections existing, but never as the focus of the level. If you're running on the ground as Sonic that's what the level designs focuses on, giving you as many places and times to jump and bounce around with freedom of movement.

I could even make the argument that Sonic CD's opening with Sonic running to Little Big Planet jumping around, doing loops, and rolling down ramps, was made to show how they WANTED it to feel like playing Sonic in that game, but I disgress. You feel CD doesn't have open level design and I'm happy to take away any merits from it.

4. This is EXACTLY what I said so it doesn't get confused.

I said Sonic 1 doesn't focus as heavily on speed as the later games. It doesn't. There are multiple levels focused only on tight platforming, which Sonic 2, 3nk, and Superstars are devoid of. Mania has a few towards the end of the game I'll give you that, but it's why I dislike Manias endgame and why many would agree the second half isn't as enjoyable (we had this discussion before in Unpopular opinions and many agreed Mania isn't paced very well and becomes just tough zone after tough zone from Oil Ocean onwards).

If you said CD focuses heavily on tight platforming too, great, that's just another reason I hate the game and try to avoid talking about it. So thanks.

5. I never wanted to talk about CD. You started this with me. And then I said I no longer wanted to discuss this but you replied again so here we are.

Not saying this to goad you into not replying either, I'm here for it now and willing to have this discussion. Just saying I really didn't want to argue about this but I'm willing to discuss this with you now.

 

I wasn't defending CD and you weren't tearing it down it. You keep bringing it up to talk about Sonic 1 but I disagree about your point about Sonic 1 first and foremost. I like CD and you don't, but that's extremely beside the point.

Yes, Sonic 1 veers more into traditional platforming than Sonic 2... but I don't think Sonic 1 didn't fulfill a promise it made, and I don't think it's fair to say there was an active discarding of that aspect in Sonic 2. You still have elements that break the flow (switches that open doors, precision platforming challenges that have to be restarted if you fail, uncooperative geometry, etc.). In the case of CD we can infer they didn't want to discard that kind of platofrming due to them wanting to build "technical" levels alongside "speedy" ones (Whether they're good or not is irrelevant).

You could say there are less stages that demand these skills from players exclusively, but they are still there. Hell, Carnival Night Act 2 may have funky slopes and lots of boosters, but it also has places you csn only go if you know how to use a weird floaty platform that doesn't use Sonic's speed in any way. So while, yes, Sonic 2, 3 and &K are different from 1, I really don't think it's enough of a difference, observational or in anything we know anout their intention, to warrant they specifically wanted to remove that aspect. After all, 3&K also feels pretty different from 2, butbit doesn't mean they specifically wanted to throw something about 2 away. I find itbhard to believe they formulated what's important about the games exactly like we do now that the franchise is far older than they were when they were making those games and we can both see things from a huge distance and pick apart every detail.

It may sound like I'm picking on you but it's a rather simple point.

 

If it puts things back on track, I went to IHOP today and got the Sonic pancakes, but made no attempt to do the IHOP rewards thing, mainly because the Amy skin isn't available for PC.

 

Xbox Amy Master Race

 

Saw that they finally properly marked down Superstars for $30 at Walmart today. Also Sonic Frontiers for the same price, and Origins was going for $20. If there's no similar markdown digitally or news on a Plus version by Summer sales I'll grab it then.

 

On Steam (In canada at least) Superstars is $39.99, Origins Plus for $26.99, and Frontiers is $31.99

 

There's a sale on several SEGA titles right now, but the prices without the sale in the UK are:

• Frontiers, £49.99 (60% off sale £19.99)
• Origins £27.99 (50% off sale £13.99
• Origins Plus £34.99 (50% off sale £17.49)
• Superstars £54.99 (50% off sale £27.99)

The regular asking price for Superstars is a joke. It needs to cost no or than £30 as standard.

 

Bag of auld shite. Not even worth a tenner. Glad I took mine back to the shop.