I can't really agree in any way. It's mainly a LEGO game with typical LEGO gameplay with physics values cranked up and automation in places trying to mimic things in Sonic that normally don't even require automation. plus you have the issue of being forced to move pieces physically on the toypad. As a "Sonic game", it's neat but short and (relatively) unfinished. as a Sonic tribute in the mold of a LEGO Dimensions level pack, it's really cool, but it's still LEGO Dimensions which has a LOT of shortcomings. excpet when it plays into the self-disrespect of Sonic projects of the time. Also playing as Sonic in the main story kinda ruined all the other LEGO games for me because he is just that much faster and it was hard to re-adapt.
I don't think it's actually the best 3D Sonic game, but it might have my favorite writing in any 3D Sonic game, so that's something! It also gave us Sonic in an open world years before Frontiers!
"Mario has been cutting back on movement" Have you played Odyssey? That game has probably the most complex movement in the whole series. Bowser's Fury doesn't have most of that since it's trying to match 3d World's control set since it was bundled in with 3d World.
I don't follow this kind of logic at all. Despite claims in these forums that the classic games were easy, the opposite discourse exists and has always existed. Besides, even if you believe a corporate mascot should be as accessible as possible, if that accessibility comes at the cost of identity, is it really worth it? Games are languages. Every interface has its own set of codes that must be learned. People have to learn how to play games regardless of how accessible they are. We as humans are now fluent in dragging and dropping, but that hasn't always been so. That's reportedly the actual reason why Microsoft incorporated Solitaire in Windows -- so saying it's basically axiomatic that loops should be the way you posit in 3D makes no sense. There are a lot of factors to consider, but certainly a corporate mascot has to deal in more than outright simplicity. Because if that were the case, why make a game at all? By being a game, and a certain kind of game, by necessity it doesn't appeal to everyone. That's not how it works.
From a business perspective: yes, absolutely. Your corporate mascot's identity, if your company is going to be around for a hundred years, needs to evolve with the times just like your business does. Look at Mickey Mouse. By the 1950s he had lost most of his original identity and personality. He was now very safe and bland as a corporate mascot, and yet that made him very accessible. I know this is hard to admit, but yes, Disney exploding into pop culture and merchandising involved a bit more than simply making groundbreaking animated features. And then by the 2010s when that was running out of favor with the public, his identity changed again to be a little closer to the original. I want to make it clear that just because I understand SEGA's design here doesn't mean I agree with it as a consumer. If it were up to me, I would absolutely want full control over loops like the fangames have. But because I understand what SEGA is doing, I'm able to accept it, and move on. You're comparing a video game to something everyone has to learn if they are to survive in business, school, and their personal social lives. How do you propose to "train" people on loops, without them saying they don't want to, and move onto something else? You don't have that kind of choice with a computer. SEGA is a games corporation. They make video games. That is why.
The 1950's were 70 years ago. Since then, Mickey went through countless iterations and it's not a given all of them were evolutions for Mickey to stay as simple and broad as possible. They made Fantasia 2000, even! Not to mention most of what made Mickey groundbreaking and unique became commonplace, most notably "mickey-mousing" -- i.e.: perfect syncing of movement and music. So even though what was once unique became safe, identity wasn't lost. Instead, Mickey became part of the very lexicon of animation and not jusst a trademark. You're talking as if evolution was a one-way road whose course doesn't depend on whatever is walking in it. If that's your business perspective, I should know better than buying anything from you ever, dear SEGA understander. Cool, then why did they need a game at all? Everyone was forced to learn it anyway, right? There's no interplay, culture or learning processes here whatsoever. Technology is an eldritch God whose plans are unfathomable and divorced from reality. Sure. So what? Most game companies don't have official mascots. Segata Sanshiro had a minor game, but it was a ""mascot" for advertising purposes front and center. You talk as if you own the most basic common business sense and whatever your grand strategy you see on (checks notes) making loops automated ins spite of all the rest of the game (Sonic Adventure has voice acting! Not the best business choice for accessibility, now is it?) is a given, but it really isn't. It's one out many possible business strategies, an probably a bad one at that. Definitely not an axiom.
I just don't like imposing these limitations because of hypothetical player struggles. Flying up a ramp to get to a platform in 3D could also be challenging for a newbie, so should we take that out too? Where does this end?
Right? Early 3D Sonic games have all kinds of trouble with camera and controls, which someone deemed acceptable enough for a launch and were in fact successful because people did learn their "language" well enough, in spite of the contrivances. Normal people who don't well in Sonic forums, mind you, and went on with their lives having liked Sonic Adventure, finishing it or not. But no, loops somehow are the way they are because of a clear business strategy only a few are smart enough to understand.
What the fuck is your problem? Do you know how to disagree with someone in a debate without being a total dick? At what point did I ever belittle or talk down to you to cause you to react like this?
Gonna scoot in and say, for the record (in case I get lumped in with DefinitiveDubs's take), that I only was arguing for you to put as much work into navigating basic loops/spirals in 3D as you do in 2D. The more intentionally challenging or experimental things can and should take the training wheels off; I was just saying the level design you have to engage with should probably skew easier for a less seasoned player to traverse. That's all. lol My unpopular opinion of the minute is that the open world concept is done waaaayyyyyy better here than Frontiers. Then again, I've already said I don't think highly about Frontiers lol. Still, it's a lot more "Sonic-y" and actually incorporates twists, turns, slopes, loops and alt paths that a Sonic game needs. Not perfect (definitely too small to follow as a true template) but it's not a bad place to look for how an 'open' Sonic game could work.
I can't think of a time where Sonic was in an open ended environment that I didn't like better than Frontiers really. Even if you ignore the fact that 2D games like CD, 3K and Mania mix wide open level design with optional objects in with more linear challenge/setpiece driven gameplay effortlessly, I can say as a general Sonic Hub disliker that I'd even prefer what was done in the older games. I wish Sonic Adventure's hub had more secrets to discover and more of the emergent gameplay opportunities the level design had but it still was of a reasonable size and had some nuggets of charm and worldbuilding that frontiers lacks. Unleashed had the NPCs and tony hawk-style mini challenges leading to secret stages. To be Fair to frontiers it at least attempts that latter thing even though I think the game's physics and low difficulty make it a lot less interesting than it could be. Even 06 was more to-the-point and had less padding. Maybe Shadow's woeful attempt at "Open world" levels like Central City and Mad Matrix would be the exception but would I really feel that way if I revisited it? Even cracking Lost Impact gave me a dose of satisfaction that Frontiers's endless fields never really did. And I'm old enough to have been coming up when Open World games were emerging, so I'm more tolerant of the "chores" that make up their design than some other fans are. It just wasn't cutting it for me. This isn't to say I don't think wide open Sonic design is Possible. I think the opposite is true if anything. He should thrive in a playground type setting where the player can just make a beeline toward stuff that excites them. It just hasn't really been attempted outside of that neat little iphone joint i still can't play yet.
I was actually about to reply saying that single screenshot looks far more Sonic than any screenshot I've ever seen of Frontiers' open zone.
To be fair to Dubs there was a point where focusing on accessibility and what was cinematic was what the entire industry was doing, but now it's pretty clear that's over with? Players are desiring challenge and friction from games now even if it's really mild and doesn't have much in the way of real consequences. It's probably fine if the player gets a slap on the wrist for coming at a loop or slope wrong. I think Sonic just decided to play it safe for too long during this entire period and now it's going to have to play catch up. More room for failure makes successful play stand out, which is what leads to your game getting shared on social media ala your Mario Odyssey balloon or your Dragon's Dogma titan battles. Even wiping out as Sonic might be fine if they found a way to make it hilarious and something you'd want to share. If we're talking what makes a game massively popular now, it's systems that are dynamic enough that give players individual stories to share. A cinematic action game where most encounters play out the same per player can still do great but it's not going to impress the same way, especially if the cinematic moments aren't that great anyway. This is my biggest reason why I feel automation and Sonic needs to be seriously re-evaluated. It's stopping the series from reaching it's full potential imo. If not, then lately I've been wondering if the series might experiment with some accessibility modes that make some shit more automated for some players. Mario Kart and Spider-Man both basically come equipped with training wheel modes where the game does the heavy lifting for you, and Frontiers gave us the keys to the entire physics engine so I can't imagine this is that huge of an ask. maybe just have it so, for an on-by-default setting, novice players just get guided through shit like that and the people that want to experiment can have a setting for that.
It's called "being awake for so long you get cranky at others". It seems this thread brings out the uglies for some, given enough time... 'dear SEGA understander' did give me brief flashbacks, though.
When I WAS a bit more sleep-deprived, it was a few pages ago when we had that conversation about surrealism and whatnot which, all in all, was pretty civil. It's just that I'm quick to overreact to condescension. Ticks me off like nothing else, but the reaction was unwarranted. So I'm sorry, Dubs. ˢᵗᶦˡˡ ᵈᶦˢᵃᵍʳᵉᵉ ᵗʰᵒᵘᵍʰ
To throw some more conceptual mechanics into the fray, a method to expand on whether automation would be beneficial or not for the player might be to include something akin to the Modern Warfare and Halo 'tutorials' - to let the player *exist* + start bashing on the controls, and naturally pick up on what might be best until said player decides to change it later. You a leftie? Southpaw for you! Miss too many balloons in the introductory course with a freeform homing attack? Maybe some autolock is in order. (I wanted to figure out some way to connect Vector's minigame in Generations to HL2's Ravenholm, but the former is wayyyy past scarier in hindsight. ) It's easier to teach someone to fish if it already feels like an extension of them, y'know? The best solution is to provide the opportunity of multiple avenues, even if it means "tedium" for the average joe.
it reminds me of the yellow paint debate. and I'm on the side of "that paint is put there because playtesters couldn't figure anything out". that is the audience you're dealing with with Sonic games. More broadly, open-world homogenization happened last gen because players dislike friction in their experiences (and online there is a raging Discourse right now about Dragon's Dogma 2 and friction in game design). FPS homogenization happened for the same reason. Players want the same controls and similar experiences that they're familiar with regardless of who made the game. Sonic as we'd want it isn't like anything out there (that the average gamer is familiar with anyway). We are inherently asking for an experience that most gamers would find challenging, and that is absolutely a no-go for most major game devs. People will pick up your game, play it for half an hour tops, get frustrated, and refund it. In this respect I actually agree with the existence of the Open Zones because they're a great way to teach a player how the controls work...oooonly for the cyber space levels to throw all of that out. I think this might be why the early 3d platformer "overworld and levels" structure had endured for so long. You have a missionless, stressless environment to mess around in and levels with objectives that you leverage those skills in.
