Man we sure haven't had this conversation before. I bet this time new points will be raised and people will finally change their mind about how good/bad each type of gameplay is.
This is not how criticism works, like at all. You don't need to be a chef to know whipped cream doesn't go that well on spaghetti. As to answer your question, maybe, maybe not. It's irrelevant anyway. Yeah, but that's not the point. The video's not there to sway people's opinions.
So you admit that the video accomplishes nothing. Existing as little more than mental masterbation for people on the internet. Thank you, my initial point stands that this won't make Sonic games better. It may make the Sonic Fanbase worst though. Sure it does because this has happened before.
The whole point of the video is a point of discussion for seeing what design choices previous Sonic Team installments did, and why they did it, along with shortcomings as well as benefits. Just because the video doesn't give you a design document doesn't suddenly mean it's trash. You're treating food for thought like it's poison. Again, this is how you ensure a dumpster fire project. Rather than bothering to learn from what others did, you chalk it up as "talent" and magic. A creative eye is very important, I agree with that, but there's so much you can learn from what others did before you. Anyone who works in this industry will tell you the same. Please explain how trying to look into the game design of previous Sonic games will make the Sonic fanbase worse.
Yet there is no game actually being made. What's the dumpster fire exactly if this is all just some silly masterbatory piece?
^You're arguing not to learn from the past, and not to entertain the critique of someone if they don't work in the industry. The dumpster fire project exists when someone takes that advice. I never knew that a video about Sonic's turn radius and how the abilities mesh with level design can cause such an aggressive response, but you do you. You really seem dead set on chalking this guy up as a pretentious fool, and nothing I can say will change that. Also, I don't feel the pointless vulgarity helped your point. This discussion is a waste of time for me and you, and I don't feel like continuing - it's derailed far enough. I'll leave it up to anyone who passes by reading this to determine what to make of it.
When it comes to Sonic, nope. Show me some modding experience, show me some games you've worked on. If not, then you're all talk and no walk.
Fair enough. I just need to prove that his critique has practical use. Actions speak louder than words after all, and I think it's all worth the challenge.
The problem is that it HAS to be put into play before you know it's any good. Me, I've been in the trenches as a beta tester. Look up a game called "Hatred". You'll find me under "MOD patch testing". During our testing, we talked at length about things to improve the game with the devs. It's was harsh, seeing our ideas fail when they were actually put into the game. You learn that everything is good on paper. Practice is a much different story.
Now I can get where you're coming from. I personally feel a majority of a game's development should be R&D. Maybe I'm being a bit to irrational, but I want to see this idea for a 3D Sonic framework in my head to be put to the test. Much of these discussions I see on Sonic gameplay get me thinking more and more about it, but as you say they exist only as words. I just wish it was feasible for me to have the time to put it to the test, I'm much too occupied with something else. One of these days I know full well this stuff can fail, and in no way am I going to take an idea as 100% fact or false. I just think that it's worth entertaining what the guy has to say, at least I know a creative drought during R&D is the least of my issues. Rapid prototyping is how these things are done, after all. You're right in saying that getting your hand into actually making the thing work is the real challenge, but I also feel that I should keep an ear out to those who have been following this series for 20+ years. As for Sonic Forces, I've said it before and I'll say it again. Pele the Beloved Dog, when?
That you were specifically a tester for Hatred seems like it explains to me part of why you have such a staunch critical take on the idea of criticism.
On criticism itself, naw. So long as the critic understands what the target audience of a given media is there may be some value. Sonic the hedgehog is a special case. Some critic claiming that change is the cause of all of Sonic's problem. (Hi Sonic Forces) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BY2HF4Lf9kI Some hack animator saying everything wrong with Sonic is identity and a lack of mature themes. (Except Sonic Colors and Generations were well received) https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL6RSSfTzNAxzxFOTVGNC9h-EF36pqeBKY An armchair game dev who thinks he has points when he doesn't. (Really, you think the spin dash is broken in Sonic Adventure, try that in a level and see how well that works) https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLr-C4V5-8-PdIXz5rePFmw5CB3R7RPe34 Some guy who wants Sonic to not be Sonic. (Simply, fuck you) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6ak3ebBep0 What happens when someone outside the target audience plays Sonic 1....Or maybe they're just trollin (the origin of the "Sonic was never good" argument). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYDsz1NFBJw And lastly, some guy who reviews the Sonic Franchise based purely on the first level of each....But comes to the obvious conclusion at the end that Sonic games (even when they are shite) sell regardless. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kE9BR24XIw The amount of videos of this type go on and on, and these are just the ones off the top of my head. And NONE of them have made the Sonic Franchise better. You know what did? A team of talented indie devs who got a chance to make a Sonic game. Bonus time. Here's a critic who doesn't allow criticism by disabling comments, try to spin why his criticism and those of his peers fail to stop a game from selling well. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJANS0VTpbY That last one is really funny.
I dunno if your post was ironic but I think a lot of the videos you presented were actually very interesting. A lot of them sucked too, don't get me wrong (the dear sega one... was pure pain to watch) But I think the one made by the people who actually give a shit about Sonic have interesting arguments. That doesn't mean that I agree with them (actually, I disagree with most of them), but having interesting and mature discussions about game design can't be a bad thing. (Also, I'm pretty sure at least one of the video maker you showed on your post have an account here. Just sayin :v:/> )
All the same, there's good criticism and bad criticism. It's up to the dev to determine which ones should be taken into account. If someone who clearly doesn't play Sonic games wants to cash in on the "Sonic is bad" meme on Youtube, then it's clear I don't need to say more. However, saying that Sonic's turn radius in Adventure gives tighter control at slower speeds but makes you skew off track in faster speeds due to how sharp it is - can't help but feel it's worth taking into account. Take all criticism and you get a game that not only fails to be enjoyable, but can't please any specific audience, and looses identity. Take no criticism and the game is more or less fated to be a dumpster fire. I see where you say Sonic is a bit of a mess when it comes to criticism, but all the same doesn't mean you should disregard what people have to say at all. Especially when the criticism comes form game mechanics at a more objective capacity. I haven't made anything at a releasable state (because time), but I've some time playing around with 3D Sonic frameworks and Generations modding. Some points made are pretty sound, especially when I've already tried my hand at making stages from scratch for Generations and came out with lessons learned. You'll never know if it holds up until you try, but doesn't mean that all criticism is void, or that taking into account the previous traps others fell into is inherently bad. I personally don't think Sonic should be treated as a seperate entity as far as criticism goes, especially with all the R&D done by fans and SonicTeam themselves. A bulk of what you learn in game dev comes from your own mistakes as well as seeing what others did wrong.
Wow... that was a pretty hateful and mean spirited post right there... :/ While, yeah, I get that after a while there is fatigue with the whole 'armchair YouTube gamedev' thing, I honestly don't agree with the idea that Sonic Team are washed up devs and their best days are behind them. This idea that indie devs need to come in and clean up the entire franchise isn't ideal. I'm not trying to knock on Sonic Mania or anything, the game is great, but it's like lightning in a bottle. When are you ever going to find an indie team as good as the Mania team that can make a 3D Sonic game of the same calibre as a Sonic Team game? Especially when the quality of 3D Sonic fangames have never been as good as 2D. I do believe that, if steered in the right direction, Sonic Team are more than capable of making a high quality game. They just aren't doing it at the moment. That's the problem.
I'd bite my tongue if I were you. You seem to be forgetting where most of the Mania team started out, and subsequently how most 2D fan projects started out. Given the rising interest in 3D Sonic surrounding the scene as of late (to the degree where people have up and recreated the 3D games engines Unleashed, 06, ect. several times), I find it hard to believe that a well versed up and coming team is incapable of making a game that's, at the very least, the same caliber as a Sonic Team game. Maybe not in terms of production, but seeing how no one gives a shit how good the games look anymore, I don't see that being too major of a factor as long as it looks good enough. Sure Sonic Team's capable of making a great game, but they've had 20+ years to do it, and for the most part, have not succeeded. If they were to be led in the "right direction" it would have happened already. Anyway...back to Sonic Forces. I'm getting real sick of the CG renders now. They don't look good in the slightest to me. Specially the cover/promotional artwork. Modern Sonic's run looks awkward and powerless. And the "angry face" every single render all of the characters have is just...too much. At the very least have them look confident or smug. They all look irrationally pissed for a scenario which probably won't be handled with the least bit of sincerity in game (or at least I hope so). In contrast, the concept sketches are really cool. They fit the whole splotchy, "constructivist" look the game's going for with the strokes and the blocky structure. Honestly this is just me bitching about how I want them to stop using the 3D renders. They rarely ever look good.
Yeah, I've been saying this for a while, but even production values in the 3D Renders don't match with Unleashed, Colors, and Generations. I think Marza hinted that they moved to a new workflow where they render everything in real-time now. Also, I don't think the issue is inherently 3D, just how they present him.
The presentation could use some work, but I think it's time they come up with some new bases for models. I praised them back in the day for finally have some model consistency, but with better tech I wouldn't mind seeing some different stylizes from time to time, as we've seen these now for almost 10 years. Like there's nothing inherently wrong with Modern Sonic, Tails, Knuckles, Eggman, Metal Sonic, and Amy, but the style is just so plain, stiff, and sterile (and in some cases, derpy, particularly Metal Sonic who looks awesome in drawings but somehow manages to look chubby in the face despite being a robot. Knuckles also has issues where his drawings look fine, but he seems to be suffering from that Zika skull birth defect). Oddly the in game models are starting to look better than the renders in some way, if only because they aren't as stiff and rigid as the renders are.
