Haven't checked in here for a while.
JucieBX, on 14 November 2016 - 08:51 AM, said:
I think I like the ability to roll and unroll as I please. It gives me, the player, MORE control over sonic.
Not dissing your personal preference, just remarking on the way this sentence seems to encourage the misconception that more control = better.
Not being able to control sonic and letting him go on a joyride was a thing I felt should be changed from the classics.
This is quite a key element of the classics' play to dislike. Personally I don't think the classics would have had such lasting appeal if every moment of rolling sat in the player's mind as "option" rather than "joyride". Sonic Adventure 1 & 2 both have unroll-on-demand, but it's a bit of an unfair comparison I know... their levels are nowhere near as playful as the classics' either way. But I always saw that as an unfortunate change, and suspected it was because the game & level designers for SA 1 & 2 saw early on that it would be much easier to build a 3D level that didn't have to complement rolling.
There are to many times, in the classics, where i roll down a hill to gain momentum and level out to lose momentum cuz I'm still in a ball. I have to jump out which make me lose more momentum.
No disrespect to how you prefer to play or anything, but what you've described here is exactly the point. "I've taken advantage of the roll, now how do I get back in control?" is in my opinion probably the best way depth unfolds in the classics. When there is opportunity to roll, new players are going to mess up its exit a lot. But the more you play, the more this decision-making enters the gameplay: "Would it be worth rolling/spin-dashing here?", "Do I want to trade explore-able junctions for speed and protection?", "Now that I'm rolling can I find a good exit tactic? Can I react to it just right?", and "Will I get a free exit, or air, out of this?"
If the player can unroll on demand the answer to all of the above is "It doesn't matter". Having to frequently and quickly decide which of two choices means more to you is, in my opinion, a long way of saying "gameplay". Also, those questions are all things we gradually get better at reading and at playing, which means they contain one of the game's methods of letting the player feel good over time about getting better at something.
If you make those questions no longer matter, that chunk of stuff is all deleted. And the only payoff you get is ease. It sells easier for sure, but it burns out sooner. All that on-the-fly decision making gets converted to a rather playless algorithm that sits in the player's mind: "If I can roll, roll always. I'll just unroll whenever." I think it's a pretty straightforward sacrifice of depth.
The more control and influence you have over the character, the less likely you are to blame the game for anything that happens because it was outside of you control.
This again suggests the simplification that reduced control = bad. I find that control-related frustration in games is an issue of crappy controls; in particular, inconsistency. I don't think it's an issue of reduced/restrained control that is otherwise solid. That kind of thing is core to many games. So if we're finding that tight, consistent, but reduced control is causing frustration, I believe the frustration is coming from expectations, not the control itself. Setting those expectations could still well be the game's fault, but for me at least I don't think the classics set that expectation in a wrong way.
Sorry to get a bit rambley there and again no disrespect to how you'd prefer to play the games. Just felt like saying what I liked about classic rolling.
This post has been edited by Deef: 02 February 2017 - 12:37 AM