I'm a sinner and I actually like the radically different alternate playstyles. I feel like the poor implementations of it such as Big the Cat, 06's barely functioning amigo characters or the Avatar don't detract from the amazing implementations of it like SA2 or Unleashed where all of the playstyles genuinely feel equal in quality and level design. Both of those games prove in my eyes that it's a concept that can work very well when Sonic Team has adequate resources to properly produce a good video game. The issues arise when they continue trying to put in multiple playable characters even though, due to SEGA stretching ST thin and having them try to push out a Sonic game as fast as possible to beef up their quarterly revenue, they don't have the budget or time to properly implement these characters, and they turn out half baked in the case of something like 06 or Forces. I guess having a more limited scope with only Sonic is a good compromise, but it sucks that it has to be made in the first place. I'm not even sure what point I'm trying to make here but I just wish we lived in the good timeline where Sonic Team wasn't held back by SEGA, because I truly believe that the developers there are talented people who want to create good games, but are just continually screwed over by circumstances outside of their control. I guess I'm straying pretty far from the original topic now so I guess I should shut up. Oh well, at least Frontiers is looking pretty good. Can't wait for November 8th.
Sonic Robo Blast 2 is a fangame not a fan mod. It was built from scratch aside from the engine (which was greatly modified from a Doom engine port), and the alternate characters are part of the vanilla game. Classic Sonic in Generations was still an alternate play style from Modern Sonic's boost gameplay, centered on platforming over speed.
Yes, I know all that, I don't know why you're explaining it to me like I don't know. Like I said, I'm judging the official products here, not fangames. And I feel like trying to say that Classic Sonic is in the same category as any other alternate playstyle is pretty disingenuous considering its literally the foundational playstyle of the series.
I feel like what Blue Spikeball is trying to say is that It's not alternate on it's own, but it's alternate in Generations and Forces because it's a secondary component to the actual meat of the game, the boost gameplay. It's just not nearly as controversial as say, the Werehog because it's already a pre established formula that people liked.
Yea, because it's literally Sonic gameplay, which is my point. Its not in the same category because while the styles are different, they both iterate on Sonic's core philosophies albeit in different ways. Its like calling 2D Mario segments in the 3D games a different gameplay style. A different style is when the fundamentals about the game literally change entirely; like if the game is a platformer and then suddenly becomes a 3rd person shooter out of nowhere.
The 2d sections in Galaxy and such kept the same physics and moves as in 3d. Classic Sonic is a whole different beast from Modern Sonic, even if he weren't 2d, as 3d Classic Sonic mods in Generations show. Literally the only move shared between the two was the spin jump, outside of the skill-only Classic Homing Attack. Tails played closer to Sonic in SA1 than Classic to Modern in Generations.
I mean I would consider Boost Sonic and Classic Sonic completely different styles considering the ways the levels are designed, the ways they control, and down to how they fundamentally interact with the ground beneath them, with Classic having pinball-esque slope physics and Modern having little to no impact on his traction by the terrain. Meh, this is getting kinda pedantic, though and we should probably divert back to the main point of the thread.
The only character spin-off games have been Tails, Knuckles, and Shadow though. I'm not even sure what could be done with other characters like Amy.
The reason I don't consider Classic and Modern as so disparately different is because they both still function over the same philosophy of needing to master the layout of the levels to get to the end. Modern Sonic is definitely far more linear than Classic and has way less alternate paths...but the function of the gameplay is the same, get to the end of the level. Compare that with needing to find specific items in an enclosed space or as I said, a third person shooter, or a beat'm up. Note, this is not not judging the quality of these iterations, just how they compare with normal Sonic gameplay. How Classic Sonic controls is a completely separate issue from the goal of his gameplay, which is the exact same as Modern Sonic's. The Avatar fits here too because outside of having a Wispon, he functions exactly the same as Modern Sonic. I don't think every character needs a spin off.
I definitely wouldn't count mecha shooters, SA2's treasure hunting and the werehog as "equal in quality and level design".
That's your opinion. I and many others find those parts of those games just as, if not more enjoyable, than the """"true"""" Sonic gameplay. The Werehog and treasure hunts especially, those styles have some of the best levels in their respective games, with stand out stages like Pumpkin Hill, or Rooftop Run Nighttime. I do admit the mecha shooting can drag on in some stages though, and saying that those stages are of equal quality to the speed and hunting stages was probably a mistake. I do still find them pretty fun, though.
A side of the divisive Sonic fanbase is that there's people with different kinds of tastes when it comes to gameplay. That "true" Sonic gameplay, classic gameplay so to say, may not be the hottest preference to such types of fans...
That's fine...but then I have to wonder what do you play Sonic games for if he is the least interesting part to play? "Preference" is only a surface level reasoning. There are better collect-A-Thons than Knuckles' stages, better 3rd person shooters than Gamma/Mech stages, and better beat'em ups than the Werehog yet Sonic's gameplay tends to be the most unique parts of these games but gets overlooked. I see a lot of people praise the alternate characters for "variety" but then never really go into detail on how or why this specific brand of variety is beneficial to Sonic. Like if playing as Sonic is boring...why are you playing Sonic games to begin with? I think the point when I realized I didn't care that much about the other characters is that any time I play Sonic Adventure or its sequel...I just play as Sonic and leave it at that. Never felt any interest in playing as anyone else.
Just because you want to have more variety doesn't mean you think the default is boring. Sonic's gameplay is consistently the most praised in any of the games with multiple playstyles for a reason.
When did anyone say that Sonic is the least interesting part to play? I just said the other characters are also fun. I feel that the fact that there are better games in the genre of a playstyle doesn't matter. On your same note, there are also better platformers than Sonic the Hedgehog. No one is claiming they're the best ever, just that they're pretty fun. Just because there's something better doesn't mean something is bad. Sonic's gameplay isn't at all overlooked either, I don't even know what you're talking about there. Sonic's gameplay is commonly cited as the best part of each of these games, it's a sentiment I disagree with but it's common nonetheless. I don't think I've ever seen anyone "overlook" the Sonic stages in my entire life.
In my experiences when someone cites wanting more characters, its generally because some don't find Sonic as interesting to play as. I can't speak for anyone else but me, but while I never hated playing as anyone other than Sonic, I can't really say I was all too interested in them either. They never felt particularly fleshed out in the same way Sonic's gameplay was. Like an extra mode, but one that kind of takes up maybe a 1/3rd or a 1/8th of the game. I wouldn't call for the outright removal, but I wasn't particularly upset when they were gone either. I can take them or leave'em basically.
I've never been fond of SA2 and the Werehog for this reason. The actual unique gameplay style that you can't really find anywhere else unless you look at indies (and even there's maybe like 2-3 that are solid) essentially plays second fiddle to watered down versions of common game genres that dominate most of the play time. I get why they exist, 3D Sonic levels are extremely costly to create and people get mad at paying full price for short games, but there were probably better options for padding the game without downplaying what Sonic is known for. There's honestly nothing even inherently wrong with switching up how the game plays, after all Nier Automata is one of my favorite games and it dips into platformer, rail shooter, and bullet hell on top of the hack'n'slash. It doesn't feel jarring because the game usually uses them in fitting context (like 9S' hacking leading to a quick bullet hell stage and the reward is being able to delete massive hordes of enemies with ease). The problem with SA2 and Unleashed (and SA1 and 06 tbh) is that alternative gameplay styles are way too divorced from each other. It's like getting 1 short but good game and 2-4 boring undercooked games in a single package. This is something I think Frontiers is a little on the right track with, the open environments, combat, and item collecting still seems fairly divorced from each other but at least they're trying to dress it all up in a Sonic skin.
On that note... How many platformers actually play like Sonic games though? I agree that just because there's a better alternative doesn't mean that is something is inherently bad, but then I'd ask what do these things off in the context of Sonic games? Fun is a subjective term and doesn't really tell me anything. People can have fun literally doing anything, but that's not an actual critique of quality. Sonic fans get up in arms when you criticize these games' shortcomings, but then when asked about their merits and positives, its always vague things like "they're fun" or "ambitious" and use that as a substitute for actual critique. Its why these discussions never really go anywhere because most of the time people talk about these games, it's not rooted in actual objective quality but in the feelings you had when you played them for the first time. I'm not gonna take away how people feel about these games and all, but I really wish as someone said, people would just call it for what it is and say these "critiques" are purely emotional and don't have much value as analytical takes. I understand nobody likes seeing something they like get its flaws broken down bit by bit, but then if you're going to defend them and try to get people to see their merits, you're gonna need something beyond the positive feelings you had when you were younger as a form of critique. I'm glad these games made you and others feel good, so what about the people that didn't feel good about them? What does a game like Sonic 06 offer someone like me, who values gameplay over narrative? Talking about how "ambitious" the game is, or how cool Shadow's story was doesn't really make me see your point.
What the fuck are you talking about, my post you quoted didn't mention anything about 06 or say any of these games are good because of "ambition". You literally pulled most of this post out of your ass. And no, I do not like the Adventure games for emotional or nostalgia reasons. I literally only first played SA1 and SA2 this year. I just think they're pretty well designed games that are a good deal of fun, despite their shortcomings that can be a dealbreaker for some. Again, I never fucking defended 06 in my post. I literally said it implemented the concepts poorly. I never said the game offered anything due to it's ambition. I personally find it interesting and the amount of lost potential in it makes me sad, but I never said it's a good game that you should play. Your post feels like a vent post poorly disguised as a "rebuttal" to what I said. Don't put words in my mouth.
