"Multiple" new Sonic games planned for 2021

Count me as someone who also thinks 3D Sonic doesn't need to be a 1:1 recreation of the Classics either.

Most 3D reinterpretations of classic 2D games generally do not play the same.

3D Mario doesn't play like 2D Mario, and 3D Zelda doesn't play like 2D Zelda.


I feel like some sects of the Sonic fanbase have become too focused on trying to recapture the same feel from the 2D games as a result of how lackluster the 3D games have been, hence the fangame obsession with letting Sonic fly all over the damn level.

 

On Sonic Adventure 1: "When seeing the completed level designs, Iizuka and Naka decided to re-purpose them for other player characters.[23] Iizuka said they felt it would be "a waste if Sonic just quickly ran through the levels that we spent so much time creating"."

From https://www.pressreader.com/uk/retro-gamer/20181228/281659666135596

Anyway, it doesn't matter if a 3D Sonic captures 2D Sonic perfectly. The real issue is lack of focus: Mario's movement in 64 was polished to almost a sheen. Sonic didn't get that level of attention because they had 6 playstyles to work on. Almost every 3D Sonic has had the "3D speed" style co-exist with some other playstyle to make the most out of the assets they have. It definitely seems like SEGA would rather have a long, mixed bag instead of a short & focused great game (and I can't blame them, most gamers these days want their money's worth, even the boost games get some flack for having short story modes)

 

I don’t even think the gameplay in SA1 for Sonic needed to be much more complex. Their discussion seems to be more about repurposing level design than about the gameplay itself.

Dunno if it’d be a problem for them these days quite like it used to be, anyways. Unleashed and onward also shares that problem, but boost levels are like 3-4x the length of an average SA stage.

 

And it's that expectation that Sonic needs a AAA budget that's ironically hurting him, because Sega feel pressured to add more content to the game than what's needed to justify the price-tag. Sonic games aren't long, at least they're not supposed to be, so the need to pad the games with unnecessary fluff always felt weird, especially when it has literally always worked to the series' detriment. Sonic games have become so focused on adding content, they almost always neglect the actual game.

I'd be perfectly fine with a 3-4 hour game if it was actually good, but that's not the expectation for AAA games; they have to be large in scale and long to justify the price, but that takes up SO much resources.

The basic gist I got is that they wanted to justify all of the effort they made into designing the world and levels rather than just having a player blast through it once with Sonic and then just put the game down.

 

I'm sorry you seem to be describing the boost games with this paragraph.

Also yes, the bolded is true. because' that's fun. You know what's not fun? Hallways?

You know what the Sonic CD intro--you know the thing that people have wanted a game to emulate since the game came out--resembles? Because it sure doesn't look like Generations or Unleashed. It resembles Utopia and GT. Hmmmm...

I don't want 3D Sonic to be a hallway simulator. Nor do I want it to slavishly stick to the design of Dreamcast titles that were heavily kneecapped and designed around extremely weak console hardware when we have vastly more powerful machines. I will take a Sonic that feels like a superhero over a Sonic that feels like Fast Mario, because Sonic is many things, but he isn't Fast Mario and until now every single 3D game has just been Fast Mario.

The classic games are so unlike any other 2D platformer series that you can name the amount of released good platformers that emulate them on one finger (Freedom Planet). 3D Sonic should be the same. It should be utterly unlike any other 3D platformer out there, and a 3D platformer that puts emphasis on Sonic's superhero ability to make a mockery of his environment and carve through it at high speed while still asking the player to skillfully control him is far more appealing than QTE simulators.

While that would be better than the QTE simulators we have now a 3D Sonic that is just prettied-up Dreamcast games isn't where I want the series to end up either, adhering to limitations borne of a weak console.

Worrying how even supposed "Sonic fans" don't realize this.

 

Dude I don't care about replicating the CD opening anymore. That was a dream like 10 or so years ago when I was much more naive to what it entailed, but like..

You ever had one of those dreams where you thought of doing something really cool and then when you do it it's not all as interesting or even as fun/exciting as you thought? Yeah, I'm kinda on that a bit about that. Soaring to hypermegaspeed and then zipping through the air and having to free-fall to the next area feels kinda mundane after a while, and also prevents the level design from having any constraint. And limitation is what produces creativity, or fun. That's like a 101 on game design.

It's the Superman dilemma. You want to have all of his powers, but the moment you get there it's no longer exciting, and coming up with limits for that becomes an active nuisance and the concept a chore. You could argue that with the boost gameplay too, but even that has more obvious obstacles and challenge than what pie in the sky is being chased here.

Also gg on the whole "supposed Sonic fans" angle. Sorry people aren't agreeing with you, mate.

 

Is it really so difficult to NOT be an asshole dude.

 

For what it's worth, the first time I heard anyone talk about "playing the Sonic CD intro" was from Zone 0's review of Generations, in reference to this:


Saying that both the constant, dynamic action and planet backdrop were evocative of said intro, as well as how you could play Sonic Boom in-game during it.

 

Is this really necessary? Conceited nature aside with the implication that you know best and nobody else does, what the hell is gatekeeping in a discussion filled with hypotheticals and conjecture doing for anyone?

When people say they want an Adventure styled game, it’s not a desire to return to literally everything Adventure was about. We’re not crying out for fishing mini-games or mechanics that don’t work half the time or any of the warts those games had. What people are asking for is the return to a game built on more organic movement, where there are more than three types of interaction with enemies.

Coming from a place where I’ve got an appreciation for almost every Sonic game I’ve played, I understand and respect whatever play style people like best, as I understand and respect that conversely there are people who don’t like certain play style and are against them returning. Is it too much to ask for you to do the same in return?

I’m not claiming that a return to the Adventure format is the singular and objective correct direction, it’s simply what I want. However, when somebody comes in here and passively aggressively berates people for the crime of wanting the games they grew up enjoying to be explored again, it becomes difficult to turn the other cheek.

 

For what it's worth, the first time I ever heard anyone talk about it was in 1995, when my cousin and I convinced my mom to let us rent a Sega CD over the weekend and we were watching the intro over and over again and singing Sonic Boom and jumping between furniture and imagining HOW COOL IT WOULD BE IF WE COULD PLAY IT FOR REAL!!! Also for what it's worth, nothing's scratched that 26-year itch as well as Generations! Like we were talking about the other day, the boost formula at its best just nails that feeling of "being Sonic."

 

I very very strongly disagree with people that think the open world Sonic concept wouldn't be better than SA1, or at the very least wouldn't go anywhere. (And I'm a huge fan of SA1 and wouldn't mind a remake.)

Utopia WAS a demo and nothing more. But man, it's weird how often I've heard people write it off because of the actual state of the demo, and not have the foresight to see the bigger picture which is just the concept itself and it's potential. Maybe it's easier for me because I've thought about 3D sonic game design since before SA1 even existed....
The feedback i saw from that demo from fans outside the fan base is unlike anything I've ever seen from another 3D sonic gameplay style. I've seen hundreds upon hundreds of comments that are like

"I'm not even a sonic fan and I would play the shit out of that",

"wow what an intense experience, it really feels like sonic",

because that idea of carrying momentum and blasting through an open environment is like the highest ideal of classic sonic, just realized to it's full potential in a real 3D space. And I say that as someone which started with the original game on the genesis as a wee lad back in the day, that concept takes it to the logical conclusion from the minds of people like hirokazu yasuhara in my opinion.

Stop judging the game as if it's a finished product lol!. Geez, a couple of people created a map because they felt like it and had zero resources behind them. It is very easy to see what an actual licensed studio could do with that. Like, the sonic cd world with all of it's vibrant fantasy with it's weird structure and exotic ruins brought to life...and you as the player get to just point and go explore all of it while bopping shit on the head. And just creating a list of things for sonic to do in the environments, progressing towards restoring order, and eventually catching up with eggman. I don't even have to try hard to see the many things that could be done with that. Edit: and all of the problem and issues with reusing assets and levels is completely eliminated in that setting, because instead of "levels" you just have a few giant open playgrounds. You just create a few maps, like island zones much like maps from the classic games , and then dump a big of shit in it for sonic to do, etc etc.

In my opinion, it's about the only idea that exists currently to make sonic an actually viable AAA game with the high metacritic scores, which sega has desperately wanted from this series for over 20 years.



if not that style...we could go down the path of the adventure formula again. In that case I'd rather have a shorter game with focused gameplay than have the game get panned for mechs and treasure hunting. And actually advertise the replayability of the game and design the game to take full advantage of that. That could work also, but don't expect it to compete with the mario odysseys and BOTWs out there if you're sega.

 

I'm just saying; if you want to point to the Adventure or boost games for being resource-intensive and then point to something as grand in scale as this would be, you are sorely misaligned in how realistic your expectations are. This would need AAA game tier staffing and production pipeline to even maybe see a good game out of it. And Sonic hasn't been that tier since idk when.

 

Haven't tried Project Hero, but Utopia, Spark 2 and Sonic GT all feel closer to the classic Sonic games than any official 3d Sonic I've played by virtue of actually allowing the player to freely take advantage of the momentum, slopes and physics. They don't automatize most of the slopes like the Adventure series, or give you a run button for instant max speed like the boost games. You need to be skilled enough to properly run through loop-de-loops, just like with the MD games.

As for the level design. Some of the momentum and freedom-based fangames I've played suffer from the issues you mentioned, but not all. When I play GT or Spark 2, I don't think "This game needs more focus", but "Look at all those paths! Which one shall I take this time?", which is pretty much how I feel when I play S3K or Mania. If the levels in those games were basically just a huge barren field or an open test level I'd agree with you, but they're not. They're a group of various intertwined paths, just like a typical zone from S3K, Mania or even SRB2. The opposite of SA1, where most levels consist in a single main path, and you're lucky to get the occasional alternate path.
Utopia does admittedly lack focus, but as many said, that's just a tech demo, not a proper, finalized level.

I didn't think that the aforementioned games suffered from scaling issues either. The level scale was finely tuned for the controls and physics. In fact, a massive scale compared to the player character is a common trend in 3d Sonic games, official or otherwise. Have you noticed how big everything is in SA2's Green Hill compared to Sonic 1? And that's to say nothing of the boost games, where the levels are specifically designed to be huge by necessity, as smaller areas and short paths wouldn't accommodate for the boost and controls.

Can't say I agree. In my mind, a 3d Sonic game that is true to the 2d games would require you to master the physics and momentum to navigate the levels efficiently. Who didn't struggle against upward slopes and loop-de-loops the first time they played classic Sonic? The levels in SA1 are specifically designed to skip this step for the most part, being filled with automation and boost pads. I could count the number of times the SA1 levels let you run on walls without automation on one hand.

And yes, I know you mentioned that the automation was a divergence from the classic games. But when the SA1 levels are designed around the automation to the point of using it as clutch, I don't think you can easily dismiss it as a minor thing.

They also put an overt focus on the Homing Attack, a factor that wasn't present in the MD games. You're never required to chain-attack enemies to cross segments of the classic levels.

 

Can tell you that's not true. I'd like more platforming in my Sonic but if it specifically did "follow in Mario's footsteps", then they can kiss my purchase goodbye.

Speaking of, I have a sneaking suspicion that I would've been a lot more receptive toward Sonic Lost World had it been aesthetically inspired more toward the Adventure games rather than trying to pander to the Nintendo stans.

 

Ugh. This gameplay doesn't resemble anything that's fun about the classic games. Stiff, stilted movement, badly paced start-stop level design. Blech.

 

.....You know, suddenly I have lot more sympathy for Sega/Sonic Team in developing these games because looking this thread, it's pretty clear that the fanbase knows about as much as they do about what makes a Sonic game good.

That is to say...next to nothing.

 

I think you may be missing the point. With a big open world Sonic game, you're not designing a huge map just for one sonic stage like the adventure games or boost games. I brought up the spiderman and mario examples because that's literally what I think of: putting a bunch of shit in a few giant maps, so sonic has to travel back and forth across the map many times to different areas, rather than blasting through a level in 2 minutes and being done. So while resource intensive, there is far more payoff in efficiency. I e., You can reuse the same level over and over if it's big and interesting and nice to look at with lots to do. The right team with the right focus could definitely pull something like that off, it's really not even difficult to imagine tbh.

Neither the adventure formula or boost games can actually do this, which is a key limitation in 3D. Not saying throw them in the trash, I think either could be a path forward. But history has already thoroughly demonstrated what you get with those styles. If you're sega just fully embrace what they are if you go down that path and advertise as such, and you're fine.

 

What sounds good on paper might not necessarily translate well to production. And reading this thread.... well you can kind of see the lack of game design experience shine through lol (not to imply I'm any better, but still haha).

Sonic Utopia is really fun to control. That's it. I don't think we can accurately judge how good a game based on it would be without some more focused levels around it. Sonic games have three things that it really needs to be good; level design, character control, and creativity. Within Utopia, we have character control, but that's all we can accurately judge. The creativity isn't there because it's a short demo of Green Hill (of course), and the level design is just a sandbox, so we can only judge a third of what a game consists of.

What I want in the next Sonic game is slightly better controls (not saying get rid of the boost necessarily, but Sonic felt worse in Forces than he did in Generations imo), more creative level themes (if I see Green Hill again in the game I will not buy until it goes heavily on sale), and level design that instills some challenge and some sense of wonder. The specifics don't matter to me, so long as it's a fun game. If it's going to be boost, I'd prefer they flesh out Generations compared to Forces. If they're bringing back the boost, possibly making it harder to boost (or maintain boost) would be worthwhile, so that boost is a reward for mastering the controls and level design, and not just something you are constantly given.

Oh, but what I would totally love, is a game that follows after Sonic Generations (mainly inspired by the best modern levels, such as Chemical Plant and Sky Sanctuary, which I think had the most varied level designs), but completely low poly (in the art style of Mania special stages). The whole "it takes a lot of resources" argument falls apart when you pick an art style that has heavy limitations... because a low poly style would be easier to produce, and create a unique style.

 

Feel like we (as in the fanbase as a whole) cling onto ideals and buzzwords for what we think Sonic should be rather than looking at game design from a practical point of view.

As long as we're capturing "momentum" and "freedom" it's apparently good, even though everything including those things comes with their own curveballs to accommodate for. Going that route is only going to emphasize how much Sonic depends on a strong sense of direction, a simplistic structure and a leash on the speed; and how badly it falters without them. No (good) Sonic game has gone without those, and that includes the classics.