[The Fralin Boy]

I think SEGA should pull a Rayman Origins and remove the live system completely. That allowed the game to be challenging but not overly frustrating in terms of restarting part of a level you were able to beat

[Sik]

The Fralin Boy, on 20 May 2012 - 12:01 PM, said:

I think SEGA should pull a Rayman Origins and remove the live system completely.

And again we're back at the checkpoint issue. Either you remove checkpoints and force players to redo entire levels just because they made a mistake at the end (only bearable if levels end up being very short) or you turn checkpoints into permanent savepoints where you can resume at any time (which involves messing with the gameplay balance), because giving infinite lives and leaving checkpoints with the current behavior doesn't make much sense (it's inconsistent).

[The Fralin Boy]

Sik, on 20 May 2012 - 12:55 PM, said:

The Fralin Boy, on 20 May 2012 - 12:01 PM, said:

I think SEGA should pull a Rayman Origins and remove the live system completely.

And again we're back at the checkpoint issue. Either you remove checkpoints and force players to redo entire levels just because they made a mistake at the end (only bearable if levels end up being very short) or you turn checkpoints into permanent savepoints where you can resume at any time (which involves messing with the gameplay balance), because giving infinite lives and leaving checkpoints with the current behavior doesn't make much sense (it's inconsistent).

Here's what I was getting at. Origins has tons of checkpoints, but that doesn't make the game easy, it makes it less frustrating. It allowed you to return immediately to where you previously left off and try that part again instead of going through parts of the level you have already beaten. Besides, lives are incredibly archaic anyway. The only point of them was to make kids put more money into the arcade machine. The only thing lives do in Sonic games is frustrate players every time they restart trying to get a better time in a level only to lose a life. (I mean come on, I'm restarting the level from the beginning anyway) Lives don't add challenge, only frustration, especially since "Game Over" doesn't really mean "Game Over".

This post has been edited by The Fralin Boy: 20 May 2012 - 01:33 PM

[Black Squirrel]

Yuji Naka's a programmer, not a designer. You can't compare him to Shigeru Miyamoto who has a completely different job.

I think there's quite a bit of evidence at this stage that he doesn't really know how to design games, so his thoughts on game design are best off taken with a pinch of salt. Lest we forget that until Hirokazu Yasuhara came on board neither Naka or Oshima knew what to actually do with Sonic or the super fancy speedy scrolly engine Yuji Naka made. Their plans were "GO FAST", Yasuhara's plans were "GOOD GAMES".


Weirdly there doesn't seem to have been many interviews over the years with Hirokazu Yasuhara. Just that one interview hosted on Sonic Retro's wiki that kinda focuses in on the 3D aspects, I.e. that time where he was drafted in to help with the level design of Sonic R, not to run the project as "GAME PLANNER" like in Sonics 1, 2 and 3. I'd be curious to know what he thinks about Sonic 4, since he's gone on record saying he was against the idea of Sonic being thrown into every scenario to make money.


Also the definition of "producer" varies between studios and many don't bother with the role. It's kind-of an oversighting thing which means you're not necessarily calling the shots on a daily basis - he likely assembled the team but a director would tell them what to do. It's just another layer of management.

This post has been edited by Black Squirrel: 20 May 2012 - 02:05 PM

[Caniad Bach]

As far as I know Naka never really cared for the Sonic games after 3K. He went on to do other things whilst Western developers like Traveller's Tales pushed out some stuff aimed at a Western market. In fact I'm not sure anyone in Japan thought Sonic was relevant any more, as Ristar was in consideration to become the new mascot. Naka concentrated on things like Nights or whatever, and stepped in to fuck up X-Treme because it was a flawed concept, and he was pissed that the stole his code without asking to make a shitty game. He got all excited about the Dreamcast and decided to make Sonic relevant again, and it was at the time well received, but the game has obvious flaws. It was hard to get the classic Sonic gameplay in a 3D setting and they had to compromise in some areas and try new things to achieve this. Not all transitions to 3D are as well formed to start off than Mario's, and I think the games problems mostly lie with trying to find ways to make the gameplay work, I mean, we, and especially SEGA, still can't quite work out how Sonic should work in 3D.

After that he went on to work on other things that he wanted like Chu Chu Rocket, and pushed Sonic off to the US. I can't imagine he made that many decisions about anything, but his name was synonymous with Sonic and looked good in the credits. A lot of people still thing he solely created Sonic, and round about 1999 then I'm pretty sure I did too.

So Naka's off in Japan going I wish they stopped bothering me with this Sonic shit, while Iizuka was leading the team, who were trying, and failing to get Sonic working in 3D, constantly using the wrong kind of feedback, or missing the point entirely; "lol play as Eggman", "lol shadows cool", "We think Sonic sucks because it doesn't look classic", "SANIK ADVENTRE 3!!!!".

I'd wager Naka saw how crap 06 was going to be and decided "I'm fed up with this shit, I'mma go Prope now".

Then 06 went down the shitter and became the best thing for the series, as it made Sonic Team reassess and completely change everything. I'm not particularly a fan of Unleashed, but it was definitely a step in the right direction, and I did enjoy Colours, and especially Generations. I think the current Sonic Team is finally willing to stick to something that works and then improve it. I'd rather something more free and more classic feeling, but I think if they keep on improving what they've got at the moment, they could start making games that matter again.

Dimps just suck though. =P

Spoiler

If none of that made any sense, I apologise. I am high.

[SpeedStarTMQ]

I'm the only person who really likes DIMPS. Sonic Advance 1, 2 and 3 were all awesome, I liked Rush, thought the Wii version of Unleashed was more fair (despite more shitty Werehog) and have also found both Episodes of 4 to be enjoyable.

But hey, Dimps are shit ?

[Hukos]

Dimps is pretty hit or miss for me. I really enjoyed Advance 1 but thought Advance 2 and 3 were mediocre, I absolutely hate the first Rush game while Rush Adventure was decent, but both episodes of Sonic 4 were alright. I don't quite despise Dimps like so many others but I'm not particularly fond of their style.

The Fralin Boy, on 20 May 2012 - 01:25 PM, said:

Sik, on 20 May 2012 - 12:55 PM, said:

The Fralin Boy, on 20 May 2012 - 12:01 PM, said:

I think SEGA should pull a Rayman Origins and remove the live system completely.

And again we're back at the checkpoint issue. Either you remove checkpoints and force players to redo entire levels just because they made a mistake at the end (only bearable if levels end up being very short) or you turn checkpoints into permanent savepoints where you can resume at any time (which involves messing with the gameplay balance), because giving infinite lives and leaving checkpoints with the current behavior doesn't make much sense (it's inconsistent).

Here's what I was getting at. Origins has tons of checkpoints, but that doesn't make the game easy, it makes it less frustrating. It allowed you to return immediately to where you previously left off and try that part again instead of going through parts of the level you have already beaten. Besides, lives are incredibly archaic anyway. The only point of them was to make kids put more money into the arcade machine. The only thing lives do in Sonic games is frustrate players every time they restart trying to get a better time in a level only to lose a life. (I mean come on, I'm restarting the level from the beginning anyway) Lives don't add challenge, only frustration, especially since "Game Over" doesn't really mean "Game Over".

That reminds me of the Ecco games on the Genesis. Hard as balls, but they had infinite lives so game overs don't actually exist in that game. Of course, it could have done well with adding in checkpoints (I think the Sega CD version adds that in, I don't quite remember though) due to the frustration levels of the stages themselves. Goddamn Welcome to the Machine

Of course, you could have a setup similar to Castlevania where a game over just boots you to the beginning of the level you were on. The levels usually are split into three segments a piece with a checkpoint in between them (And sometimes just getting to the checkpoint can be exhilarating just because of what's in your way) . Sometimes it's not necessarily a bad thing to get booted back to the start of the level, since the Castlevania games are based around intelligent sub-weapon use and if you don't have that particular sub-weapon.... life suddenly becomes much, much harder for you. Level 4 in CV1 is the best example I can think of. Holy Water destroys the boss of that level, however without it, dealing with the fleaman that's jumping around the room is damn near impossible! One might call it cheap, but there's a degree of satisfaction that comes from conquering games like this.

[MastaSys]

SpeedStarTMQ, on 20 May 2012 - 03:39 PM, said:

I'm the only person who really likes DIMPS. Sonic Advance 1, 2 and 3 were all awesome, I liked Rush, thought the Wii version of Unleashed was more fair (despite more shitty Werehog) and have also found both Episodes of 4 to be enjoyable.
But hey, Dimps are shit ?

I actually liked Dimps back then in the Advance days, I started to raise my brow with Rush and then 4-1 made me hate them.
4-2 it's better but I still can't feel effort from that..... it's really a shame.

[The Fralin Boy]

MastaSys, on 20 May 2012 - 06:11 PM, said:

SpeedStarTMQ, on 20 May 2012 - 03:39 PM, said:

I'm the only person who really likes DIMPS. Sonic Advance 1, 2 and 3 were all awesome, I liked Rush, thought the Wii version of Unleashed was more fair (despite more shitty Werehog) and have also found both Episodes of 4 to be enjoyable.
But hey, Dimps are shit ?

I actually liked Dimps back then in the Advance days, I started to raise my brow with Rush and then 4-1 made me hate them.
4-2 it's better but I still can't feel effort from that..... it's really a shame.

Yeah but remember when Sonic Team couldn't make a decent game and Dimps had to carry the series. Well now this is kinda the opposite. I think we should give Dimps a little time to find what works and what doesn't in their Sonic game, I mean we never really left Sonic Team even during games like 06 and Shadow the Hedgehog. Also Dimps has only really made one bad game, 4-1 (and even that's debatable). Rush, Colors, and Generations were at least decent.

[Turbohog]

I was a fan of dimps at first; Sonic Advance 1, 2, and 3 are well designed, programmed well, and are simply fun to play. I've hated everything they've done after that, starting with the Rush series. Also, Black Squirrel knows what's up. Naka is a fantastic programmer and I'm still impressed by the coding of the original Sonic games. He doesn't seem to be as great at game design unfortunately though.

[Ayu Tsukimiya]

I remember hearing that Naka and Oshima left SEGA because they went "too far up the ladder" to make any creative decisions on the games. What's all this about him being a bad programmer/designer? I'm guessing his lack of influence was what made Heroes mediocre and Shadow/06 abysmal.

[SuperJXJ]

Turbohog, on 20 May 2012 - 06:37 PM, said:

I was a fan of dimps at first; Sonic Advance 1, 2, and 3 are well designed, programmed well, and are simply fun to play. I've hated everything they've done after that, starting with the Rush series. Also, Black Squirrel knows what's up. Naka is a fantastic programmer and I'm still impressed by the coding of the original Sonic games. He doesn't seem to be as great at game design unfortunately though.

I've personally taken a shine to the Advance games as well, as well as their outstanding soundtracks. I've played the first Rush, though it wasn't great enough for me to keep it for too long, at least in my opinion. And while the Classics were great programming-wise, I still remember quite a few hiccups every now and then, mainly blasting through the level so fast as Super Sonic that I literally broke the game and got trapped in a floor, though that's very likely only due to the primitive technology (compared to today's standards of course). I hope Naka will come back to Sonic in some way though, it'd be interesting to see how he's changed and what new things he can bring to the series now that we've seen Iizuka's take on things for a while now.

[Palas]

Even though I believe the greatness lies within Naka's, Oshima's and Yas' partnership, I think Yas was more important than Naka. Not that Naka wouldn't be a terrific addition to Sonic Team - it's just that Carol Yas is simply one of a kind and can't be copied.

Quote

Weirdly there doesn't seem to have been many interviews over the years with Hirokazu Yasuhara. Just that one interview hosted on Sonic Retro's wiki that kinda focuses in on the 3D aspects, I.e. that time where he was drafted in to help with the level design of Sonic R, not to run the project as "GAME PLANNER" like in Sonics 1, 2 and 3.

You mean the one by Gamasutra?

EDIT: Yes, you do. Man, that interview is like a bible to me.

This post has been edited by Palas: 25 May 2012 - 03:11 PM

[Sik]

Palas, on 25 May 2012 - 03:05 PM, said:

it's just that Carol Yas is simply one of a kind and can't be copied.

Or the fact that he was the one responsible for the level designs in the original games, and level design makes up like 90% (or more) of the gameplay in a platformer.