They also added a seventh Special Stage and Chaos Emerald, Super forms, Elemental Shields, and scrapped beta elements within the debug mode.
It is a restriction by definition but I worry that people interpret this as "They were misled and now can not do what they want" rather than "They are aware of it but just want to do it." I also don't really fundamentally consider it a restriction, it's a project goal and a design plan first and foremost particularly if it has been laid out. Now, for instance, if they were told "Ok guys you have your own Sonic project!", signed on, and then had all of this dumped on them then I will gladly retract my statement and admit to corporate folly, but I can't wholesale agree with the idea that they are being told what to do in ways that make them uncomfortable/inhibit them. I genuinely don't believe they'd take up a project they didn't believe in/felt like they could deliver with. Perhaps this is but a misinterpretation of tone on my part (it happens a lot on any website, online verbatim is very difficult I do concede) but it just seems odd to me this narrative, but alas, it's just how I feel. This project, to me, is a test in every sense of the word. "Can they do it?" is the question I imagine SEGA is asking, and it makes sense. Do some new levels, and then see if you can improve on our old work. Going forward after this will probably mean completely new games entirely, but perhaps their thoughts on this is that if they can work with the old and use the new stuff just as well, they'll be ready going forward. We also have to keep in mind that this game is going to be played by EVERYONE, perhaps people that have never played an old Sonic game before or can't appreciate the legacy. Perhaps these old zone remasters might help them see what we did when we played them, and get them acquainted with the series in full. I'm just rambling at this point.
Ain't that the truth. From this point on, I'd kinda hope they don't celebrate another anniversary until 50. If nothing else, only celebrating "big" anniversaries rather than every five years will make them a bigger deal, which in turn will make the anniversary marketing that much more meaningful.
The 5-year anniversaries were a bigger deal when sega released a sonic game once a year. But now that we only get one "real" sonic game every 2 or 3 years, an anniversary game ever 5 years seems overkill. I agree that big anniversaries should still be celebrated but it'd be nice if they only came out with one good game every 3 years and an anniversary game every multiple of 10th anniversary.
Gotta agree with that. The Sonic series is starting to feel more like "Sonic The Anniversary", specially since we haven't had a truly good non-anniversary game since Colors.
Ya I get that feeling too, hell even Sonic in Lego Dimensions is more anniversary pandering (I mean I guess what else would it be, but still, hi Green Hill Zone Act 74). But while there is a lot of nostalgia pandering at least it's quality. But idk, nostalgia pandering isn't always awful if done correctly. Kirby's entire existence has been nostalgia pandering and those games are fun.
Echoing what's been said, after Mania I hope we'll be done with throwbacks (although they do look great in Mania) I understand though why they feel the need to. Bring old fans back that may have left the series at Adventure (I know allot of people that did) so kinda easing them back to the series with familiar tropes. It's not really necessary though imo.
I don't think noting an anniversary is a bad thing, but if they're going to do this big thing every five years it definitely loses its impact. I think they should do more of a Mega Man kind of thing. In 2002 the original Battle Network 3 came out in Japan just over a week before the 15th Anniversary. There was no special reason for the game other than it being the next one in the series, and to commemorate the anniversary they slapped a logo on the US box (released in 2003) and called it a day. You could say that Star Force was made to commemorate the 20th Anniversary, but I doubt it. ...Okay, so clearly Capcom has been treating Mega Man poorly for longer than we thought, but I think it's not an entirely bad idea to just note the anniversary and move on. Games don't need to be made because it's the __th anniversary. I think 25 is a big year, but after this they don't really need to do any huge anniversary things until like 50, like Covarr said. A lot of times Nintendo does stuff because certain games are hitting milestones. Wind Waker HD came out on the 10th anniversary in the US, Twilight Princess HD came out 10 years after the original, and there are more but I can't think of any more right now. They also have many more franchises to pick things from, but I think my point is somewhat clear.
They would celebrate Sonic's anniversary every year if they thought it would sell an extra 3 copies...
Plus, the 50th anniversary would be a long ways down. If 5 year increments are too frequent, I think 10 is more reasonable.
I don't think Sega was planning on Sonic to become Sonic The Anniversary in 2011, but the main reason it happened, at least for me, was mostly Boom's failure, as well as some failed experiments during these 5 years. Maybe Sega was betting on Boom being the next big thing for Sonic and that's why the "Generations team" (for lack of a better term) isn't releasing anything until 2017 (and the teaser makes it look like a Generations 2). Maybe Sega was similarly betting on Runners not closing down in 2 years, or maybe they hoped Lost World would have been the next step in 3D Sonic gameplay after the Unleashed formula. But Lost world was disappointing (and Sega obviously decided to not use that gameplay style again), Runners is dead, and Boom will probably be dead too since considering what sega is doing to the 2nd season it feels they don't really care about the Boom brand any more. I think that's why Sega is pushing the "anniversary" angle again, because it was the most succesful and critically acclaimed Sonic has been in the last 2 generations (if not longer). Reusing the 2D Classic/3D Unleashed gameplay in Project 2017 could also be taken as a way to use a formula that works. Maybe even Mania exists for a similar reason, because it's a formula that works and it's loved, and Sega doesn't want's to mess up for the 3rd time in a row. Of course, Sega did fail to capitalize on the succesful parts of these 5 years. All Star Racing Transformed was very succesfull yet Sega and Sumo stopped working together (and the DLC plans for the game were all over the place). Sonic Dash was succesful but Sega apparently though it wasn't enough so they kept pushing more mobile titles for no reason. Sonic 1 and 2 remastered were praised yet they remain mobile exclusive.
It's impressive that through all the failures they had with Lost World, Boom, and Runners that they only recently remembered the sheer amount of money they made from the Sonic 1 and 2 remasters.
SNK did quite a similar thing with King of Fighters. They didn't do an anniversary game for 2004, but did use the year to celebrate 10 years of KOF. There were some PS2 releases around that time with the Anniversary logo before the title screen (like Maximum Impact), and I always liked this sort of approach, as it gives the player a chance to reflect on the legacy themselves (however relevant it is to them) without it being thrown in your face too much. Regarding anniversaries, I'd be happy with a dedicated anniversary game every 10 years. That's enough time for material to be made to fill in the gaps. That being said though, I'm glad Mania exists, except I'm looking at it more of an extension to the 20th anniversary legacy more than anything. (as much as I didn't hate Lost World, I can't see myself ready to celebrate it's existence just yet! )
One could argue this notion of ignoring the value of the classic games goes back earlier with Sonic's decline over the past two videogame generations. Mega Collection (Plus) continued to shift significant units as late as 2008 (a compilation first released as an exclusive in 2002 and going multiplatform in 2004, by the by), in stark contrast to most other Sonic titles; and in terms of aggregated units sold over several of Sega's IR reports, it's probably the best-selling Sonic game in modern times outside of the Mario and Sonic Olympics series. There's also that pre-smartphone mobile version of Sonic 1 that had eight million downloads. One could say that they finally got the memo on revisiting the roots with Sonic 4, but even then, they still decided to make it on the cheap with the low-budget downloadable episodic approach; despite the original NSMB on the DS and the Wii sequel --major Mario titles given retail releases-- outselling every other Mario games on their respective platforms, by the tens of millions. That's not getting into Sega choosing to develop the game a studio head and a secondary studio who have both openly steered the series away from its foundations in the first place.
Regardless of the poor recent decisions, you have to admit Sega of America has done a good job repairing the PR side of things.
I'm not aware of any other series that banks on its anniversaries as hard as Sonic. They've given special branding to every 5th anniversary since Sonic Adventure 2, but in more recent years it's begun to feel like too much. Sure, Nintendo talked about the 25th anniversaries of Mario and Zelda, but that was just for promotion, it didn't appear in the games themselves. Between Sonic Generations, Sonic 4: Episode 1, and now Mania, we really don't need to see Green Hill Zone or the Death Egg boss again. Don't get me wrong, I'm super excited about Mania, but I would much rather they focus their efforts on new and original things instead of devoting a large percentage of the game to redoing old levels. It feels like a weird demand made by the higher ups at SEGA to get more sales, made even weirder by the fact that the game will miss the 25th anniversary year anyway.
I'd say Kirby. That series is just one big Green Greens nostalgia trip. Mario's been edging on that territory lately too. Sonic is the only series that really seems to give a crap about 5 year marks, but I really think that's only played a big roll in the 20th and 25th anniversaries. 10 and 15 were for the most part nothing more than adding a logo in the credits. And technically Mania might be in the 25th anniversary year, if you consider the anniversary year to be between June 23, 2016 and June 22, 2017. Mania will likely just barely make it.
...What was the last Kirby game you played? I'd dare say Kirby does the best job out of any series when it comes re-using older ideas without making them feel stale. Planet Robobot was filled to the brim with callbacks and nods, but almost everything used was either something that hadn't been touched by the series in years or mixed with a new idea to keep it fresh. Honestly, I'm hoping Mania follows the same route, what with Taxman saying that Green Hill was the "tamest" of the remastered levels.
I play Kirby games all the time. I'm not saying they handle the nostalgia poorly, I'm just saying they use it a lot and they have been for years. They're not as anniversary year focused as Sonic is but they do peddle the nostalgia angle a fair amount. They use it well though. I know I want this game to be a surprise but I kinda want to see 1 more remade level just to see how tame Green Hill is by comparison.
