-Classic Era is Dragon Ball - The start of the series, is more light-hearted and kid-friendly, but still has some action. Is a smash hit with the kids at the time. -Adventure Era is Dragon Ball Z - Characters and art style start changing to be less cutesy, tone is darker and more serious to appeal to slightly older audiences than the original, there are several retcons made on the spot, and the action is ramped up significantly. The changes cause a slight split in the fanbase, but it also brings in a new generation of fans. -'Dark Ages' Era is Dragon Ball GT - Creators of the original series at this point have little to no involvement with this direction, and just left other people to their own devices, which leads to a more experimental direction that comes off as edgy fan fiction. Is largely hated by many, and is very divisive within the fandom. -Modern Era is Dragon Ball Super - One of the creators or original staff returns (Toriyama/Iizuka) to do away with the previous era, and tries to reign things in. The result is an attempt to combine elements of the first two, and most popular eras, while also trying to bring in a new Generation of fans. This leads to a more light-hearted direction at first (Battle of Gods/Colors) with lots of Nostalgia pandering, which helps bring back in some fans from the previous Generations, but many fans are still largely mixed on it. To try to win back the fans of the darker, more action-oriented stuff, they try pandering to the nostalgia of that crowd with content that is dark and feels out of place with the current direction (DBZ Resurrection 'F', Super's Future Trunks arc, and the Universe Survival Arc/Sonic Forces). Also brings in some questionable retcons (There's now 12 Universes, Future Trunks has Blue Hair while Kid Trunks' hair is still Purple in the anime, Potara Fusions are now only permanent for Gods, Super Saiyan is caused by a 'tingling' feeling in your back instead of rage/Sonic's world is now split into two, Classic Sonic is now from an alternate timeline/dimension). Is considered a return to form to some extent, though it's still largely criticized within the fandom. That's pretty much how I see things. Now we wait for the Sonic equivalent of DBS Broly to bring the series back to form once again.
People keep bringing up non-game examples, and I don't think it's really apt to do. For one, games are comparably more expensive in both terms of time (especially when accruing skill is required) and money (which has incentivized developers to bulk games up with filler to better "justify" the price thereby feeding back into time). For another, games disparate continuities don't come with just distinctive aesthetics and tone, but also different physics and mechanics, which adds yet another filter on who will and won't find satisfaction therein. Turtles in Time didn't require people put up with bad physics and busywork, either.
Honestly I think it just comes down to people like both designs but often times they like one more than the other, so does it hurt to have two lines? I don't think so. I like Classic Sonic more than modern and all the merchandise I get is Classic related, but some people only like Modern Sonic and hate Classic stuff. So to each their own.
Sega should decide on an identity and stick with it, even if that identity is a vague one that allows for user interpretation. One of the biggest problems for Sonic in both terms of design and overall worldbuilding is Sonic never knew what the fuck Sonic wanted to be. Is Sonic the Freedom Fighters or is he Waku Waku Sonic Patrol Car? Is Sonic (okay Shadow, but bear with me) a gun-toating maniac with super edge, or is Sonic the one we know from adventure? Is Sonic a Werewolf? Is Sonic an anime character and which one? Is Sonic a multi-demensional entity with one version of himself permanently stuck in the past and arguably a figment of Tails's imagination? Is Sonic Jim Carey's nearly freakish looking sidekick? I don't know and neither does Sega! Legend of Zelda is fine with having an identity crisis because it consistently embraces it and makes it part of the player experience. Mario knows what Mario wants to be. I think it is time for Sega to do what Nintendoes as well. Sonic should have an identity. Sonic has changed as part of Sega wanting to make fans happy, and maybe that in and of itself could be part of what Sonic's identity is, but as of now Sonic is so inconsistent and I really would like to see that change.
re: the thread's title: Whether or not there's a "good reason", there are multiple designs, and there's no changing that. I think that if there are multiple designs that people find some appreciation for, then there's no reason to not have multiple designs. Even "classic" Sonic has multiple designs, from boxart and sprite differences, to animated design differences.
Amen man, and that Zelda example is great. I think you articulated my thoughts better than I could, I'm not great at explaining myself via words on a screen.
Not to mention, as much as some people blame the multiple designs for fracturing the fanbase, removing one won't make things any better. Fans of the scrapped design will get pissed off, and the fanbase as a whole may end up worse off.
I think people are blowing it out of proportion. Was bringing Classic Sonic into Sonic Generations not a good way to celebrate the 20th anniversary? Did it not make sense for Sonic Mania, a 2D sprite based game that revisits Mega Drive levels and plays just like Sonic 3, to use the Classic Sonic cast? Sonic Forces, that was the bad one, where it didn't make sense. But when it makes sense to use the classic designs, they should do so.
But treating classic like he's some alternate reality younger brother to Modern is where I find it a bit unnecessary.
For as much as people say they don't give a shit about Sonic and continuity, why is it that the only things people bring up are Classic Sonic and Wisps in that "OH BUT THOSE DON'T MAKE SENSE." Does any of this make sense? Did anyone question why Station Square in SA1 ended up looking like San Francisco one game later? Sonic's planet itself makes no sense. Somehow it's home to Unleashed, Heroes, Adventure, the Lost Hex, Forces, and Angel Island. How? Sonic's world used to only have animals, then it had a shit ton of humans, and then they must have all got the coronavirus because they've been missing since 2008, and now we have a bunch of furries. And then of course the whole SA2 moon thing. Like that's fine but Classic Sonic and Wisps are just the question of the decade apparently? I mean at the end of the day it's a business decision. People like both, but some prefer one and some prefer the other. Why alienate a whole chunk of fanbase in the pursuit of things "making sense."
I think at the end of the day, none of this really matters in the long run, and it seems like it's only a vocal group of fans that care about any of this. Casuals don't care, and SEGA and Sonic Team don't care too much about this either. Nostalgia makes money these days, so they're gonna keep milking it as long as they can, so long as it remains profitable for them.
Well, I would say that a consistent theme/vision would make the Sonic brand stronger, and the reason there are so many opposing opinions on this subject in the first place is because of the mess Sega has made of the Sonic universe over the decades. They have consistently failed to capture a mainstream audience due to a lack of vision. We cannot deny that just because we the hardcore minority are willing to put up with more weird shit than your average person would. Most of the concepts thrown around by Sega the past few games have been far too abstract and odd for the mainstream market they sorely need to re capture. I personally really liked the environmental/man vs nature theme that the the very first Sonic game had, and would liked to have seen more of it. It had a lot more depth than people gave it credit for, whilst at the same time being beautifully simple for everyone to understand.
Then your issue is with story continuity, rather than character design. Making Classic Sonic into an alternate universe contradicted Sonic Generations. But it also solved most of the lore contradictions between the pre and post Adventure games. So in terms of maintaining the continuity, there's no one correct answer.
I just wish that in the future they would keep different designs in different games, rather than continuing to hodgepodge different styles and elements in one game like Forces. "Classic" and "modern" should be different stylistic interpretations of the same characters, with Mania sequels being the realm of the classic style and 2D gameplay. None of this younger/alternate universe crap. Agreed.
This is kind of hard to put into words but I don’t really think any of this needs fixing. If they decide to change some stuff and streamline things that’s fine but I’m not bothered by it. When you have a long running franchise multiple branches happen. I don’t see a huge difference in Sonic’s Classic and Modern gameplay other than 2D/3D. They’re both a mix a fast paced zipping and traditional platforming. The boost and wisps are more like power ups or attacks imo. Certain games have a more stylized direction but are still straightforward. The side characters have major differences but mostly in the 2 Adventure games. As for the story/continuity/world. That’s kind of been split since the start right? Unintentionally maybe. In Japan it’s earth in America it’s mobius. Both work depending on your preference. I think the movie needed to separate the planets or it would have required a big explanation for anthropomorphic origins. Overall I think Sonic should be allowed different types of stories and situations. He’s a character inside of a universe. It’s bound to have all sorts of happenings and he’s part of it. Separate timelines/dimensions is up to the individual imo. I personally think of it as all the same, like I mentioned before. I take the crossovers more like time travel. How Generations portrayed it. I know Sega and whoever is in charge of it probably consider them separate continuities the way Forces/Mania and the Phantom Ruby were done but I can easily go along with it for the sake of a given story. It doesn’t break anything for me even though I view it the other way in my mind.
I don’t think Sonic Team are that bothered by contradictions. Iizuka said at the Sonic Boom 2011 event that although they put links between the games, each title is separate from each other (did he mean separate dimensions?) and they don’t want fans to think too much about the connections. Sonic Runners Secret Rings episode was a good example of this. The episode was a sequel to the Wii title, but none of the Sonic characters had any knowledge of the events of Secret Rings, apart from Omochao who kept dropping references to the role Sonic played in the Wii game, even though Sonic knew nothing of it. It was treating Secret Rings as being both in and out of continuity. On Facebook, Iizuka explained it by saying that Secret Rings Sonic and Runners Sonic were different Sonics.
To me the point is more that SEGA should at least begin to think where they are going with things. The franchise has been around nearly 30 years now. If they are going to embrace inconsistencies, do it artfully and with intent like LOZ rather than just kind of half-assing it in a way that often feels like a gimmick or an obvious attempt at brand refreshing like Boom. Edit: This isn't to say each game should be a new Sonic, but rather that when they do decide to branch Sonic off it should feel like a design choice rather than a plot hole or a reskin.
