Because the boss shows you that it's going to crush you before it crushes you. You say this, and then go on to quote Covarr talking about how OOZ1's boss does this exact thing. I'm sorry, but you can fuck off. You argue in bad faith and do not understand how reasonable debate works. Consider yourself ignored.
If you're gonna try to argue boss design while at the same time making an argument for removing them entirely, expect your motives to come into question. And no, the OOZ1 boss does have a warning, you may get killed the first time but after that it is YOUR fault. As I suspected, you were saying something generic to try and make a point even though it doesn't apply to Sonic Mania or any specific Sonic game. And yes, I stand by that quote by Koji Igarashi. If the boss programmer can beat the boss without taking damage, the design is sound. If the player sucks, there is nothing you can do about that except give them a Luigi cube of shame.
I really don't understand why you're saying that it does have a warning, when we all know and can verify that there's none... Do you mean that the warning is the boss killing the player?
Robot makes the green tops pop up with a scripted sequence that last several seconds. Plenty of time to get out of the way or duck. Quit pretending the player is unable to learn after the initial cheap launch.
Are you deliberately ignoring the fact that that the player can't initially see the insta-kill spikes that he's being launched into?
Unfair comparison. This is one boss with you only ever potentially falling to it once, as opposed to an entire game where it's the primary mechanic.
But... Thing is, it's the same kind of problem/unfairness (killing/hitting the player with something that can't be seen coming on first try), Syobon Action just happens to make constant use of it to achieve its "so bad it's hilarious" state.
Maybe in the base Mania the tops didn't shake before launching, but as of Plus they absolutely do. So I see no issue with the boss, even if the spikes aren't readily visibile from the start of the fight. Furtermore, if you die more than once to that mechanic, its on the player not the game. One death on the boss shows you that you need to stand only on the center two tops. There are other bosses in Mania that deserve more attention than this, such as the far-too lengthy fights in FBZ act 2, Metal Sonic, or Heavy Rider. While none of them are difficult, or have any cheap tactics, the fights can go on too long. Thankfully Metal has signposts to save progress, a trend I'd love to see continue for any multi-tiered boss fights in the future. Fights where you have to wait ages to get a single hit in (or maybe two if you're lucky,) are the most frustrating in my book. Flying Battery is the worst offender of the ones I listed, since frequently I make it to the boss with less than 2 minutes left on the timer. My last run with Sonic & Tails had me beating that vile spider with no seconds left.
A quick take on the bosses--personally I think if we're going to be keep the two-boss structure 3&K and Mania received, I think there should some more specific rules in place for how bosses are designed. Back in the original debate in the Mania thread about the game's boss designs, I said I saw the greater emphasis on window-dependent attacks (i.e. have to wait for the right opening to land an attack) as an attempt to bring more variety towards the way you defeated the bosses; even though it had the negative effect of dragging out the runtime of the bosses in general (a complaint that I agree with). S3&K, while less dependent on attack windows like Mania was, I think also has the tradeoff of many of the bosses feeling rather rote and overly similar, regardless what the hazards for the bosses were or their environment. I also thought in that regard, Mania did a better job than some of the Genesis-era bosses in having the bosses match the immediate environment / zone theme and incorporating the use of zone gimmicks into their design--which isn't necessarily required, but it is something I felt worked really well in giving Mania its own identity in comparison to the Genesis titles. Bosses in Sonic games are IMO a balancing act of keeping the bosses fast-paced like the standard gameplay while also keeping them surprising and unique; and so far, I felt S3&K and Mania in their approach to having bosses at the end of every act have both ended up leaning on opposite sides of the spectrum, rather than finding that ideal sweet spot (although I'd say S3&K was probably closer to the middle than Mania was). In light of that, part of me wouldn't really be too bothered if we went back to a one boss per zone structure as with the earlier Genesis games. At the same time though, ICEknight did bring up a good point in another thread that if the bulk of levels are still going to be pretty dense / large in size like S3&K and Mania were, bosses for every act are likely needed to better break up the platforming monotony (whereas the S1/2/CD levels are shorter and more straightforward). --- Anywho, on the topic of evolving the classic gameplay, I have two quick suggestions to throw out: 1. Now that Mania has proved the formula still holds up (and namely doing that by adhering very closely to the original structure, despite some changes and additions it brought on its own terms); the series could stand to receive some sort of "modern" shakeup in the design structure, in the same way Nintendo did for NSMB/DKCR. It should try experimenting more with the existing core mechanics and elements, and not be afraid to swap out some old ideas for new ones. 2. Take the vanilla Genesis formula that's there and finally translate it to a 3D platforming environment. By referring to the "vanilla formula--what I mean by that is in bringing the gameplay to 3D, stick more with the core materials, and don't get too worried about bringing over all of the additions made. I actually think doc eggfan's floated notion of making a classic Sonic game that is closer to the original Sonic 1 and its concepts would actually make more sense with a true 3D platforming game rather than doing so with a 2D sequel. Namely because I think it would help apply a "Mario 64 / Zelda: BotW" design feel of making a game that while clearly taking notes from the original game is also applying it in an contextually new environment. I also think making a Sonic game that focused more on the platforming elements rather than the speed as the original game did, is also something 3D Sonic games in general have sorely needed.
One final addendum to the boss difficulty discussion, here's a video of boss rush in Return to Dreamland done with no damage. Watch and marvel at the player's skill while questioning, "This is the difficulty Nintendo thinks is okay for a pre-school audience?" On that note, anyone else just feel really happy playing Kirby games? I lean more on the route of experimentation with level specific gimmicks over changing the core moveset. Like someone else mentioned, Tails being able to find his Cyclone in a level or how Triple Trouble had power ups which altered the gameplay via power ups (spring shoes, rocket shoes, etc.). Likewise, different characters can offer changes to the experience without breaking what has already been established (Like say Amy getting a super jump if she jumps while at top speed ala hammer jump). There is also what I advised of using new game modes to experiment with gameplay changes like how Encore Mode does in Mania which has the bonus of not breaking the core gameplay if it turns out to suck. Sonic Adventure and Sonic Heroes both accomplished this to varying degrees. It is what someone described as "Anal Bead" level design where it rotates between speed section and platform/beat'em up section. The issue is that while multiple paths exist in Sonic Heroes, they were just that, multiple paths. It wasn't using your speed to launch off a slope to get access to a faster path or using said speed to bypass certain platform sections. Sonic Adventure did this but wasn't refined in later entries. Sonic Unleashed's levels have something like this but at those moments I question whether or not the developer designed it that way or if the Boost/Air Boost was just that overpowered. Instead of using speed, later entries have homing attack chains and periodic "go right for secret path" to achieve this effect but this is lacking in my opinion.
I'm curious now, due to the issue with the visibility of the insta-death spikes in the Meter Droid encounter, does the concept of telegraphing extend to the overall level design or simply the boss design? I ask due to the existence of bottomless pits. In the modern games there are warnings that highlight the pits, but no such warning sign existed in the Gen/MD days. In order to find out that a drop had no bottom, you had to fall and lose a life. At least in many cases. I'm sure some were visibly dangerous. Having never really thought it before, I now understand the importance of mechanics being showcased throughout the level to inform the boss fight, and would generally agree that the boss should not introduce anything radically different. Though if it does introduce any mechanics, it ought to be fairly easy to read. I've never had a problem with sacrificing a life in order to witness all the mechanics/conjuring a strategy however, and wouldn't write that off as poor design.
Eh, I can give Heroes some points for its art direction in its levels (which does a really nice job of evoking the artstyle of earlier Genesis titles) and being one of the rare 3D Sonic titles that doesn't go ham with genre roulette playstyles, but I really wouldn't consider it an example of a 3D translation of Genesis gameplay. The gameplay focus are the teamwork mechanics/enemy fights rather than momentum-based platforming and they're built on top of the post-Adventure 2 approach to designing levels and game mechanics (speed > everything else), rather than following from the Genesis style of design. As for Adventure 1, I'd say that game is a scenario where an attempt to bring the classic gameplay into 3D is there, but it works only up to a certain point and/or it only applies to certain parts of the design. It's not fully realized or accomplished in the same way Mario 64 or Zelda: BotW did for their respective playstyles; namely because the overall product is aiming for a distinctly different path that moves away from the original games. Adventure 1 to me is more of a shift, rather than an evolution.
Just a random thought on the Score and a possible Score Attack mode: Would it work to incorporate the ranking system from the Adventure era? I state Adventure because (aside from Sonic Unleashed) the Modern games take no skill to get an S-rank. We have: Time Score Ring Score Level Score Death penalty I like this idea. There is also the score attack from the "Megaplay version" of Sonic 1 but I haven't tried it so I can't comment. https://info.sonicretro.org/Sonic_the_Hedgehog_(arcade_game)
I played a little Mania last night, and I've noticed that it's quite easy. I'm not sure whether that's due to the fact I've grown up playing the original Sonic games and have gotten fairly decent at navigating via momentum, or whether the game is objectively easy. But it makes me wonder whether the addition of a "Hard Mode" would be welcome in a potential sequel. How could that be implemented though? The addition of more enemies? Different types of enemies with multiple hitpoints? Less rings? I think that the Encore Mode set up of no-lives with a switchable character roster could improve the difficulty. In regards to general additions outside of difficulty, I know I've said it before, but hidden collectables would be quite awesome. It would add a ton of replay value to the levels. I was playing Mirage Saloon with Mighty and Ray last night, and I noticed that the level was expansive but quite empty. I think with the sheer size of the levels in the Mania incarnation (and presumably going forward) there just needs to be something more. Not some huge drastic change, just something extra sprinkled in. Maybe something like branching level paths and secret exits a la Super Mario World.
It's interesting because I found Mania pretty easy as well, but on release I saw no shortage "Sonic games are so hard" comments. Makes you wonder where your experience and the reality meet.
I think that maybe it's a bit of a learning curve due to the unique momentum physics that other games don't have. Combine that with enemies and obstacles and I can see why someone would think it was hard. But I think that maybe once you've figured that out, as long as you're somewhat decent at platforming games the rest kind of sorts itself out. Level design often holds your hand in these games, and if you miss one path you're bound to fall ass-backwards into another, and given the lack of collectables there's not much need to backtrack unless you're specifically looking for Giant Rings.
The difficulty of the classic games are a question of memorizing the level layouts and muscle memory more than skillful execution hence why my first playthrough of Mania was on the painful side. Skill is staying on the higher path in most cases. The difference between them and some of the modern games is that punishment means falling to a lower path instead of dying (usually by pit). That is one of the fatal errors I wish they'd fix in the modern games. I don't think you can make the Classic games harder without making them really cheap.
If you're here, chances are you're going to find Mania easy. I can tell you that the rest of my social circle who bought it did not have the same ease of playthrough that I did.
Yea Mania was basically muscle memory from the start for me lol, but I did get a time over in Flying Battery act 2 the first time which surprised me.
