[grap3fruitman]

I feel like Sonic 1 is an acquired taste but is easily the best game in the series once you pass that hurdle. Does it hold up? I feel it does just because I think it takes some appreciation to enjoy in the first place.

[HEDGESMFG]

Is Sonic 1 the weakest of the Genesis games? Yes. In my view, without a doubt. It lacked many later innovations that simply made the games better...

But it's still part of the classic genesis "trilogy", and that still puts it up there with the best in the franchise for me.

Compare what you see in Sonic 1 to what the rest of 1991 had to offer in gaming.

Buttery smoothe 60 FPS.

Fluid platformer physics that are instantly easy to grasp, for young and old alike.

A unique variety of levels each with distinctive gimmicks that separated themselves from mario and megaman titles.

Stage design that is challenging, but ultimately very fair and beatable, even without save states.

Cool cartoony visuals that hide the limited color pallete far better better than most games of the era, to the point where I dare say it set the standard for 16 bit art, a standard which is still stylistically followed now.

Music that, while still retro... began surpassing the traditional bleeps and bloops of the 8 bit era and actually became 'music' rather than just a quick jingle or outright noise.

Does Sonic 1 still hold up now? The sales of Taxman's remake shout testify to that. Remember, he added a few nice features... but he didn't change 'that' much about the game, and it still got top sales on the portable market.


Sonic 1 holds up far, far, far better today than just about any game from 1991 or earlier, with Super Mario World being the 'only' true contender. And it easily beats that in the scope and depth of each level, music, and visuals.

This post has been edited by HEDGESMFG: 06 February 2014 - 02:56 AM

[ICEknight]

HEDGESMFG, on 06 February 2014 - 02:55 AM, said:

Compare what you see in Sonic 1 to what the rest of 1991 had to offer in gaming.

Buttery smoothe 60 FPS.

Fluid platformer physics that are instantly easy to grasp, for young and old alike.

A unique variety of levels each with distinctive gimmicks that separated themselves from mario and megaman titles.

Stage design that is challenging, but ultimately very fair and beatable, even without save states.

Cool cartoony visuals that hide the limited color pallete far better better than most games of the era, to the point where I dare say it set the standard for 16 bit art, a standard which is still stylistically followed now.

Music that, while still retro... began surpassing the traditional bleeps and bloops of the 8 bit era and actually became 'music' rather than just a quick jingle or outright noise.

I'm not buying this, Sonic is not SEGA's first good 16-Bit platformer. =P


Also, 60FPS used to be the norm for non-polygonal games (still is, I hope?).

HEDGESMFG, on 06 February 2014 - 02:55 AM, said:

Sonic 1 holds up far, far, far better today than just about any game from 1991 or earlier, with Super Mario World being the 'only' true contender. And it easily beats that in the scope and depth of each level, music, and visuals.

Sonic beats Super Mario World in level depth WHAAT.

This post has been edited by ICEknight: 06 February 2014 - 11:34 AM

[Covarr]

HEDGESMFG, on 06 February 2014 - 02:55 AM, said:

Sonic 1 holds up far, far, far better today than just about any game from 1991 or earlier, with Super Mario World being the 'only' true contender. And it easily beats that in the scope and depth of each level, music, and visuals.

I need you to replay any Vanilla Dome or Forest of Illusion stage right now. Sonic 1 is good, but Super Mario World is pretty much the pinnacle of 2D level design, especially in depth.

Also, I'm gonna disagree on music also; maybe it's just because I didn't own the game until much later than 2 and 3 so I don't have the same nostalgia factor, but the music always felt like a weak point to me. On the other hand, I absolutely adored the butt rock from later in the series that other people seem to hate, so maybe my musical taste is just weird.

[Nova]

Covarr, on 06 February 2014 - 12:46 PM, said:

HEDGESMFG, on 06 February 2014 - 02:55 AM, said:

Sonic 1 holds up far, far, far better today than just about any game from 1991 or earlier, with Super Mario World being the 'only' true contender. And it easily beats that in the scope and depth of each level, music, and visuals.

I need you to replay any Vanilla Dome or Forest of Illusion stage right now. Sonic 1 is good, but Super Mario World is pretty much the pinnacle of 2D level design, especially in depth.

Also, I'm gonna disagree on music also; maybe it's just because I didn't own the game until much later than 2 and 3 so I don't have the same nostalgia factor, but the music always felt like a weak point to me. On the other hand, I absolutely adored the butt rock from later in the series that other people seem to hate, so maybe my musical taste is just weird.

I totally get what he means though. Super Mario World had great, deep and intricate level design. Sonic 1 had amazing atmosphere though and I think that's what is being 'got at' here.

In terms of level design, Sonic 2 is a much better example of complex and deep-thought level design. Look at Chemical Plant for instance. Designing the lines for various paths and speed runs must have taken either an extremely long time, or a very, very keen mind.

[HEDGESMFG]

I stand by my original statement.

Super Mario World is a brilliant game, far grander than Sonic 1 in sheer ambition. Debatably the best of any mario game in what is no doubt one of the best platformer series of all times. A serious contender for one of the best games of all time even... They also had to design more levels than Sonic 1, and did some amazingly clever things with them.

But...

But...

Are you seriously trying to tell me that this...

http://www.mariomayh...anillaDome2.png

Surpasses the sheer complexity and scale of this?

http://www.soniczone...sbz-act2map.png

Sonic's levels were amazing in compared to most games of the time. It's not quite metroid or castlevania, I admit, but the sheer sense of and scale exploration was much greater.

[Covarr]

Do Super Mario World's levels win in terms of complexity? Nope. Scale? Not even remotely. But depth? Absolutely.

Let's take a look at the maps you linked: Scrap Brain 2 is incredibly complex, but not very deep at all. There are branching paths, but all any given path has to offer is a different set of obstacles. It's certainly more interesting, what with the large variety in obstacles and a good balance between horizontal and vertical movement, but in the end, any given path is still quite linear. Vanilla Dome 2, on the other hand, may just be the greatest stage of any 2D platformer of all time. The game already had a long-running trend of hidden exits, and this level really pumped that up to 11 by hiding it behind a puzzle, with any of four different ways to fuck it up. What's more, this puzzle is implemented in such a way as to rely on and enhance the platforming elements of the game, rather than just grinding it to a halt the way the labyrinth zone switch puzzles did. If you fail, it's only a few seconds wasted and you can still get to the end.

But even ignoring alternate exits, the exploration in Sonic 1 was never significantly more than choosing between branching paths. Super Mario World has secrets everywhere. Hidden lives, hidden bonus areas, and dozens of different ways to get to them. Some are found by flying, some are found by pipes, some are found by identifying things that are more than just setpieces, and some are unlocked by switch palaces... Let me put it this way. In Sonic 1, there may be different paths to the finish, but all paths are pretty much equivalent. Sure, they may have different obstacles or twist different ways, but it still boils down to "get past things to get to the end". Super Mario World has obvious paths, hidden paths, and even secrets in non-paths (see: all the sky stuff in Donut Plains 1) and the content in each one is vastly different. Some are obstacles, some are shortcuts, some are secret exits, some are bonuses, and sometimes they're a combination of those.

I suppose what I'm trying to say is that there may be a lot less to a given stage in SMW, but every single bit of it is just so much more meaningful; not a single buzzy beetle in the whole game is anything but deliberately and meticulously thought out. It's simple, but beautifully and elegantly so. This is something I feel that Sonic 3 & Knuckles achieved, and to a lesser extent Sonic 2, but the first one never managed that. I'll grant that it was complicated, but most of the time I don't think that complexity added depth. Replay value, maybe, but not depth.

[Lobotomy]

Better question: Do we really need one of these types of threads every five fuckin days?

But to answer, It was what it was, it changed the platforming genre in a huge way (e.g. if a platforming game isn't a Mario Clone, it's a Sonic Clone), and it always will be exactly what it was. This is exactly like comparing Sonic Adventure to Generations or Colours. There's nothing to compare, because it was good at the time and it shows its age just like anything else. It's still enjoyable, and it always will be. I fail to see why this merits discussion, but that makes me a hypocrite for discussing, doesn't it?

This post has been edited by Lobotomy: 06 February 2014 - 05:07 PM

[NiktheGreek]

Well now, if the topic title didn't make it obvious that this was the mother of all loaded questions, the original post sure did. The presupposed rose-tinted dishonesty on the part of people who feel that the original game has stood the test of time, that is quite breathtaking. I'd almost admire it if it weren't brunette.

Sonic 1 is still great. So there.

[Neko Kit Su]

Adding to the Super Mario World and Sonic 1 discussion-- both are a few of my favorite games of all time. Super Mario World could've only benefited from the overworld, which would have allowed such logical reasons to have puzzles in the first place. Sonic 1's lack of an Overworld means the more linear levels make sense, but the multiple paths are very much fun to take.

Even atmosphere, the two at are odds with each other. Sure, Sonic 1 had more unique tropes, and I love Scrap Brain Zone, but Super Mario World had a more coherent atmosphere. I still love the Castle designs and music.

Overall, my favorite of the old games has to be Sonic CD. Sure, weird level aesthetics, but they were huge, with fantastic music. The Special Stages are also the best use of Mode 7 (emulated or not) I've ever seen. That includes F-Zero.

But it's much the same way that I like Yoshi's Island even over Super Mario World-- it was a quirkier take on the series, with cartoony graphics and catchy music. But it had fantastic atmosphere.

This post has been edited by Neko Kit Su: 07 February 2014 - 02:44 PM

[SpeedStarTMQ]

Think of it this way:

If a game is still sold 22+ years later to people of all ages and still enjoyed as much as it was back then, then yes, I would definitely say Sonic The Hedgehog has stood the test of time.

It's difficult to say if it's the best of the original series; Sonic 2 added 2-player and more varied stages, Sonic 3 & Knuckles was a radical change is design (graphics, soundtrack, longevity, more 2-player features and unlockables and a save feature) and did stuff even recent games haven't achieved. All in all, the original trilogy were varied enough that Sonic 1 stands as it's own experience and is all the better for it.

What makes the game even more compelling is the mystery of the development.

http://sonicology.fa...z/marble2lg.png

[DimensionWarped]

Clutch, on 02 February 2014 - 09:53 PM, said:

I basically only enjoy 50% of the levels in the original game.

This. And then for a lot of the rest of the levels I actually find them somewhat irritating. In my case it's not that Sonic 1 has aged terribly. I never really cared for it much to start with. Sonic 2 just gave me a whole lot more of what I liked about the series and a whole lot less of what I disliked. All the style and purity in the world doesn't make a damn bit of difference if the levels aren't fun.

Covarr, on 06 February 2014 - 04:09 PM, said:

But even ignoring alternate exits, the exploration in Sonic 1 was never significantly more than choosing between branching paths. Super Mario World has secrets everywhere. Hidden lives, hidden bonus areas, and dozens of different ways to get to them. Some are found by flying, some are found by pipes, some are found by identifying things that are more than just setpieces, and some are unlocked by switch palaces... Let me put it this way. In Sonic 1, there may be different paths to the finish, but all paths are pretty much equivalent. Sure, they may have different obstacles or twist different ways, but it still boils down to "get past things to get to the end". Super Mario World has obvious paths, hidden paths, and even secrets in non-paths (see: all the sky stuff in Donut Plains 1) and the content in each one is vastly different. Some are obstacles, some are shortcuts, some are secret exits, some are bonuses, and sometimes they're a combination of those.

Sonic also has plenty of secret rooms replete with hidden lives and it also has rings in the sky specifically set up for fancy bounces off of badniks. Jazz Jack Rabbit and Commander Keen would do much of the same a little later on. Much of what you are describing though is stuff that was done simply because the game is slightly different in what it sought to achieve. SMW is a head to the right style platformer sure, but it moonlights as a puzzle game. That doesn't mean the levels themselves are deeper. That just means that they often have a puzzle or two shoved in them and more often than not they aren't especially congruous with the level design (obvious exceptions going to the star road levels and Forest of Illusion). All this stuff that you get with flight just wouldn't have any purpose in a Sonic game that lacks flight. Basically, the distinctions you are making here just seem a little pointless.

Quote

not a single buzzy beetle in the whole game is anything but deliberately and meticulously thought out.

Yeah bullshit. Look, I know that you can do amazing things with jumps in a Mario game and most of the time the chains are incredibly well thought out. But level design isn't that calculated of an activity by nature. I'm sure enemies and blocks and such would have been shuffled around until they arrived at positions and whatnot that felt right, but it isn't really like every single minute detail in SMW was just a calculated cog in some grand master plan.

And you know what you get when every single enemy and block is thought out in perfect agonizing detail? A shitty rom hack level and generally one intended purely for cheap deaths at that.

This post has been edited by DimensionWarped: 19 February 2014 - 03:34 AM

[Palas]

Covarr, on 06 February 2014 - 04:09 PM, said:

Do Super Mario World's levels win in terms of complexity? Nope. Scale? Not even remotely. But depth? Absolutely.

Let's take a look at the maps you linked: Scrap Brain 2 is incredibly complex, but not very deep at all. There are branching paths, but all any given path has to offer is a different set of obstacles. It's certainly more interesting, what with the large variety in obstacles and a good balance between horizontal and vertical movement, but in the end, any given path is still quite linear. Vanilla Dome 2, on the other hand, may just be the greatest stage of any 2D platformer of all time. The game already had a long-running trend of hidden exits, and this level really pumped that up to 11 by hiding it behind a puzzle, with any of four different ways to fuck it up. What's more, this puzzle is implemented in such a way as to rely on and enhance the platforming elements of the game, rather than just grinding it to a halt the way the labyrinth zone switch puzzles did. If you fail, it's only a few seconds wasted and you can still get to the end.

But even ignoring alternate exits, the exploration in Sonic 1 was never significantly more than choosing between branching paths. Super Mario World has secrets everywhere. Hidden lives, hidden bonus areas, and dozens of different ways to get to them. Some are found by flying, some are found by pipes, some are found by identifying things that are more than just setpieces, and some are unlocked by switch palaces... Let me put it this way. In Sonic 1, there may be different paths to the finish, but all paths are pretty much equivalent. Sure, they may have different obstacles or twist different ways, but it still boils down to "get past things to get to the end". Super Mario World has obvious paths, hidden paths, and even secrets in non-paths (see: all the sky stuff in Donut Plains 1) and the content in each one is vastly different. Some are obstacles, some are shortcuts, some are secret exits, some are bonuses, and sometimes they're a combination of those.

I suppose what I'm trying to say is that there may be a lot less to a given stage in SMW, but every single bit of it is just so much more meaningful; not a single buzzy beetle in the whole game is anything but deliberately and meticulously thought out. It's simple, but beautifully and elegantly so. This is something I feel that Sonic 3 & Knuckles achieved, and to a lesser extent Sonic 2, but the first one never managed that. I'll grant that it was complicated, but most of the time I don't think that complexity added depth. Replay value, maybe, but not depth.

How is anything you said even remotely relevant to the point? If secrets are what you would say is what adds depth to a level, then Sonic has always had plenty of them. But they are not in "where", they are in "how". It's not about secret areas in Green Hill, but about how you can use the areas you already know of in a completely different way and finish the act in less than 20 seconds. That's deep. The thing about Mario levels is that the secrets are and must be in the level. Sonic has, because of aspects of his gameplay, to offer cues in the level for the player to perform a secret. Exploration isn't, never was the point. So the switch puzzles in Labyrinth Zone are, in fact, immensely simple compared to anything SMW has to offer. However, how you do it is what counts and for what purpose. Branching paths aren't even the most important part of Sonic, you know? Why does everyone focus on this aspect of level design when Marble Zone, with all of its linearity, offers ways for the player to draw his own path within it in so many different ways? Everything in Sonic is meaningful too. Automatically so, because it's up to the player to use the elements laid out in front of him. Mario, of course, has always had genius level design that also lets you do amazing stuff just jumping here or there, but since this is actually inherent to Sonic, all levels naturally focus this one kind of depth.

I wouldn't talk of Scrap Brain Act 2 if I were to expose how deep Sonic 1 can be. I'd take Spring Yard. There's room for absolutely everything in there. Not so many secrets, no, but the levels are horizontally expansive and yet you can finish it in less than 30 seconds if you perform secrets instead of finding them.

Once again, it's not about "I didn't know there was such a thing in the game", but "I didn't know you could do that to reach the same place".

This post has been edited by Palas: 19 February 2014 - 05:45 PM

[DimensionWarped]

It has both where and how actually. Just off the top of my head in Sonic 1 I can think of the following:
Green Hill Zone - jumping behind the spikes near the beginning of act 2 to get to the bottom side of the level with a bunch of item monitors, destroying false walls for short cuts and more secret areas (https://www.youtube....h?v=jkiOz2rCa60)
Marble Zone - False walls that you can walk through to get to hidden item boxes
Spring Yard Zone - Get behind the walls to collect rings and avoid obstacles