I can definitely understand that, but I guess what makes a boost game for me is different from what makes a boost game for others. But that's great, cause if we all agreed on everything and only ever wanted the same things, sonic would very quickly turn into a new super mario bros kinda situation where every game is basically the same as the last one Edit: cause we posted at the same time and I don't wanna double post... I mean, if you take a look at how big act 3 of speed highway is compared to another stage with multiple paths, like that one open area in seaside hill- the stages used to be a lot smaller. Most sonic games now are scaled to like, 30x sonic's size. I miss when things were accurately scaled in the games like adventure 1 and 2. I think it says something when most modern fangames have to increase the size of the entire emerald coast stage tenfold in order for it to even remotely be playable. Sonic shouldn't be the size of a literal needlemouse in order for the stage to work. That's when you know sonic is too fast
I completely agree with this and I also dislike it in Sonic Utopia. To be fair, I think Generations was aware of this and worked around it by making everything bombastic and over the top - the Gun Truck with razor blades, the huge spinning wheels on Seaside Hill and the massive turtles, the huge number of police cars chasing you in Speed Highway etc. So I did like it, but they definitely had to make a quirky style to make it work there. Actually, one thing I did like about Lost World was that they did scale the levels down to Sonic's scale and with some exceptions like that awful sweets level, it felt less like Sonic was this tiny creature in this massive world. Man, how long will I go on until I admit that I kind of like Lost World
My experience IRL outside of the fandom is exactly this, yes. Unfortunately those most vocally calling for the fifth try at Sonic Adventure 3 are choosing to ignore it.
I dunno. The Adventure games are very popular and Adventure 2 in particular has a huge place in the memory of those who don't play Sonic often because it was an early Gamecube title. Even my best friend, who hates Sonic, has played Adventure 2. They don't get as passionate as people on here do, but I've definitely chatted with people who would buy an Adventure 3 or a game which went back to the style of Adventure 2. And I've chatted to people who think the modern take on the series is kind of lame, even if they don't get as intense about it. Although I do think that the appreciation of Adventure 1 in the fanbase is mostly a discussion within the hardcore fandom. In terms of cultural significance, I'd say it goes Sonic 2, Sonic 1, Sonic Adventure 2, Sonic Heroes.
While a new adventure game is my personal #1 most wanted sonic game, I don't think we need it at all. I'm cool with getting another mania, or another boost game so long as it's not another forces, but considering the reception forces got, sonic team is almost guaranteed to throw the baby out with the bathwater again, so who knows what the next game will be like.
I've seen more than a few people outside of the fandom who thought Mania was great, and thought Forces was just alright. The hard-core fans have a terrible habit of being hyperbolic and exaggerating things to justify their attitudes. The Adventure games are certainly popular and well remembered, just not to the extent that fans think.
I'm not bothered at all about getting another Adventure, I just think it's undeniable that Adventure 2 is very fondly remembered by many people in the same way that Crash and Spyro are.
Yea, as flawed as Adventure 2 may be, there's absolutely no way anyone can deny the impact its had on the franchise, arguably even moreso than its predecessor.
Absolutely, SA2 is the game that galvanized the generational divide we've been talking about. Before that, the most controversial things among us were, "Which Sonic CD soundtrack is better?" or, "Does SatAM/AoStH/Archie/Fleetway use enough elements from the games, and how much does that matter?" But SA1, and even moreso, SA2, took the main series in a noticeably different direction (darker, a bit more serious, and MUCH MUCH more anime), which not everyone was thrilled about. There were heated flamewars through the latter half of 2001 over whether this was an appropriate swansong for the last Sonic game on Sega hardware. (I shudder to think how much MORE heated it would've been if we'd known how Shiro Maekawa felt about Genesis-era Sonic back then, haha.) And then it got ported to the Gamecube. Surprisingly, it reviewed SO much worse than it had on the Dreamcast among mainstream critics. But it had the gall to become the best-selling third-party game on the system, introducing a legion of kids who weren't even aware Sega had ever made consoles to this new, controversial take on the series, and ensuring that's how they'd always see it. That really did change everything. When I was in college, I'd regularly encounter people just a few years younger than me who insisted that, "Sonic 2 Battle Adventure" (they seemed to struggle to remember the name, they played it when they were so little) was "the last good Sonic game." They'd wonder why they simply hadn't made any good ones since then. And this was AFTER Unleashed, Colors, and Generations were out, but I think the series had such a poor reputation by the late-00s that a lot of folks assumed they were trash on principle. On the other hand, I've NEVER heard anyone IRL say a good word about Heroes (the SA2-types, at most, just said it sucked compared to SA2), but maybe the big fans of that game were young enough that I never encountered them in college. This is also why we should thank our lucky stars that compilations like Mega Collection happened. As much as people whined about it at the time (we expected Sonic Jam 2 and didn't get it, basically), if the Gamecube kids hadn't had an avenue to play the classics, these disparate sub-fandoms would have even less common ground. Heck, I regularly see people waxing nostalgic over that DS collection with the crappy emulation nowadays! Point is, yeah: Sonic Adventure 2: Battle was just as influential for kids of the 2000s as Sonic the Hedgehog 2 was for kids of the 90s. The fact that those games are so distinct from each other led to, IMO, the most significant split in a very broken fanbase. If your first Mario game was Odyssey, and mine was SMB3, then we're still recognizably fans of the same THING, yknow? But if your formative idea of Sonic was SA2, and mine was Sonic 2, then we may be fans of some very different, not-particularly-compatible ideas. That's how we get to Colors being a return to form for some, and a rejection of form to others.
I love heroes! But yeah, you present a good case for the reason why each generation brings such a split. I always forget that sonic adventure 2 was the last sega console game and the first multi platform one
This is why Nintendo are so protective of their IP's, they didn't want anyone to feel left out from picking up their games no matter what generation they're from. The same things that were in Mario 1 in 1985 are still around as of 2020. Its funny you say that though, because you have a similar split among the Mario RPG's. It was only recently when Nintendo started to homogenize the RPG's to be more in line with the mainstream games, so all of the unique aspects of the RPG's were gradually decreased. A lot of people assume all Mario games are the same, but Mario was arguably just as experimental as Sonic was. The only difference is that Mario's experimental nature was mostly limited to the spin offs, with the main games being mostly untouched.
Super Mario Sunshine has entered the chat. I find it amusing that Mario and Sonic both had gamecube games about crime, mystery, and saving an entire populace as a whole that were extremely divisive to the fans... And then they both got Wii games about going to space that were universally loved at the time. (Also, it's cool how people compared early footage of Super Mario Sunshine to Sonic Adventure. Looks like Sonic's not they only one accused of being a copycat)
I didn't mention mention Sunshine; while it WAS divisive, it was also the only mainline Mario game in that generation. With Sonic, you had SA2, Heroes, and Shadow, all in the same generation.
Sonic Adventure 2 was a big fish in a small pond, being exclusive to and very successful on the low selling Dreamcast and GameCube. It had a big impact on the direction of the series and the online fandom even more so, but at a time when the series was nowhere near as big as it was during its Mega Drive heyday, or Crash and Spyro were during the PS1 era. Sonic Heroes sold more copies, by virtue of being a multi-platform release, but didn't review as well or inspire as much of a fandom. Games (and all media) that leave lasting impressions tend to have longer lifespans than better selling contemporaries that don't. I wouldn't be at all surprised if SA2 has surpassed Heroes' sales when you take the re-releases into account. But it's the Mega Drive Sonic games that tower over everything that's come since. They're the ones that are ingrained into pop culture and the collective consciousness, keep getting re-released on every platform, and always sell. Past that, there's no specific title that has had nearly as much impact or presence, good or ill, not even the Sonic Adventures. Instead, what has had impact is the cumulative effect of decades of sub-par games, with a few good ones and a few more awful ones sprinkled in, but no big A+ return to form. Maybe if they'd continued with a steady stream of B/B+ releases like Sonic Colours and Sonic Generations they could have rebuilt the series' reputation in a slower, less showy fashion. But they immediately followed up with a bunch of D and C- releases, squandering that goodwill. The legacy of Sonic Colours and Sonic Generations could have been the games that turned the series around, instead they're just "pretty fun, worth playing" blips in a sea of disappointments. Sonic has earned the, largely justified, reputation of a series that used to be great then completely lost its way. Until Sonic Mania, which was exactly the critical darling and audience pleaser they'd needed for decades, but was presented to the world as a cheap and cheerful budget digital game, an appetiser before the big HD Christmas period physical release Sonic title. The dissonance was astounding. From day one you could tell that the western Sonic brand management team knew which was the right horse to back, but as far as Sega as a whole was concerned, Mania was the B game and Forces was the A game. Basically, Sonic has never had a true renaissance. Crash Bandicoot, Donkey Kong, Tomb Raider and Mortal Kombat have all shown it's possible, though their lows were received more with apathy than derision. If Sega use Sonic Mania as a road map, but with the scope of something like Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze, I think they could pull it off. Looking toward Sonic Adventure 2 or such for direction and inspiration feels like looking toward Donkey Kong 64. In theory it could be built into something great, but it's just not worth the effort when they could build on much better games with significantly greater cultural cachet.
I feel like Adventure fans are reluctant to really back Mania for the simple fact that, as Josh mentioned, it's not the Sonic that many grew up with. I've talked with many people about this actually, and while everyone acknowledges Mania as the critical darling that it is, as well as the cultural impact it and the Classic games have, the fact remains that it's not the design or games that people fell in love with the series with. Just because you understand something logically, doesn't mean you emotionally accept it. And that's where people who grew up on Adventure era lie in regards to Mania; the elements that got them into the series are either ignored or actively shunned by the majority, while the parts they don't have much attachment to are praised and lauded. We even discussed that too, in that despite being an overall mediocre game, the public were still willing to throw praise unto Sonic 4 simply because it was a 2D game like the classics. So it can be very frustrating as an Adventure era fan to understand that the elements that made you a fan just aren't seen as fondly, and are actively being removed for being "wrong". It's a shitty feeling to have that I sympathize with even if I don't QUITE feel the same. That's why there's so much push for an Adventure remake from the vocal minority; because they want validation that their favorite iteration of Sonic wasn't "wrong" and that it can stand up to modern standards like Mania. That's the underlying reason I can theorize. It doesn't help that Sega have started to segregate the Classic and Modern branches and draw distinctions between both designs. So now Classic is seen as the prodigal son who everyone expects great things from by the majority, while Modern is the face of the "average to mediocre" games. That's why there's so much resentment towards Classic from the vocal minority, because it actively feels like Modern is being downplayed in favor of Classic, which just adds to that frustration I mentioned. Its exceptionally petty and immature, but people can't help how they feel and what got them into the series. It's like how Sally Acorn fans have to accept that she's never going to be a major part of the series like she was back in 90's, and being continuously mocked by the few toxic Sonic fans over it.
It even goes the other way: some fans at the time did hype it up as some true return to form before backtracking hard. Just compare how SMCJohnny talked about Sonic 4E1 in his review versus his review of E2, nearly 2 years later.
Hmm, I don't think they're a vocal minority (unless you count that even if the margin is only 1%). Yeah, I agree with your post. I constantly see Boost and Classic fans s*** on adventure fans for liking the "objectively wrong" games, and it hurts to see such elitism in the fanbase. No sonic games are wrong. Every single one has value, no matter what you grew up with. I despise sonic labyrinth, but even I can give it wholehearted respect for what it did and the fans it has as a puzzle game (plus the OST is a banger). People's opinions change over time (that's why we made this thread) and I'm hopeful that one day adventure fans will get their mania, and everyone in the fanbase can be a little happier. And tbh, with the sonic cycle, I think that day could be soon... :D
No, they are. It's why they're so vocal to begin with, if they were getting what they wanted, there would be no need to speak up. Something you gotta understand about fandoms; the hardcore and vocal fanatics are always going to be dwarfed by the casual gamers who play the games leisurely. That's called the Silent Majority, and that's where most of the sales of the games come from, and who publishers aim for when they make these games. Sure, vocal fans are usually how information about a game spreads through word of mouth, but for the most part, they're still significantly outnumbered. The fact that fans are so vocal about the Adventure games is a testament to the impact they left within the fanbase, but nobody outside of them are really singing their praises. As @Pengi mentioned, the Classic games are always going to have more attention both within and out of the fanbase; they're not only the games that put the entire franchise on the map to begin with, they're also the only games that most of the fandom agrees are actually consistently great and are, at worst, maybe average. You have older gaming fans who remember Sonic's rise in the 90's to this day, and you have a new generation seeing what games like Sonic Mania bring to the table. As someone who grew up with Sonic Adventure 2 as his formal introduction to the series, the impact that game left will be nowhere near what the Classic games left and that's just a fact. It's like expecting Mario Galaxy, as critically acclaimed as it was, to be as revered as SMB3 or SMW.
I don't think this kind of thing is really worth the discourse it's often given. If a tiny group of people are mad that another group of people are enjoying something, that's on them. Not every game will please everyone, and trying to make one that does will end up satisfying no one. However anyone feels about Sonic 4, I think it can be said without controversy that it isn't nearly as good as Sonic 1-3&K or CD. It certainly wasn't as warmly received as Mania. But I think the glimmers of positivity from outside the hardcore fanbase are a testament to the mainstream appeal of the core, traditional Sonic gameplay. After Sonic & Knuckles, 2D Sonic games were relegated to handheld systems. A lot of adults who played video games didn't play things like Game Boy Advance. For most of the general public who grew up on Sonic 1, 2, 3 & Knuckles, their gaming experience was Mega Drive, then PlaySation, then PlayStation 2, then PS3/Xbox 360 (not both) and/or a Wii. They never had the wow factor of "Sonic is finally in 3D", back when 3D was shiny and new and Sonic Adventure was the fastest and most graphically impressive console game around. Their re-introduction to Sonic after Sonic & Knuckles would have been alienating and largely shoddy experiences like Sonic Heroes, Sonic 2006, Sonic Unleashed or Sonic and the Secret Rings. So Sonic 4, lousy as it was, would have been a breath of fresh air, because at least it was the kind of thing they expected Sonic to be. Not enough people showed up for Episode II, of course. The promise of a 4th Sonic game was enough to draw people in, but the quality wasn't high enough to bring them back for seconds. When you compare Sonic 4 to similar products like New Super Mario Bros. Wii, Mega Man 9/10, Rayman Origins, Donkey Kong Country Returns and Castlevania: The Adventure ReBirth who can fucking blame them? It's downright embarrassing. But given the trajectory we've seen platform games go in, it really does beg the question, why hasn't Sega fully re-embraced 2D Sonic as the core product? In the mid/late '90s the big-ticket games absolutely had to be 3D. That was what was new, what was exciting, what was selling, while 2D continued as a niche. So making 3D Sonic games was the right call, while 2D games continued on handheld systems that couldn't do polygonal graphics (many series took the same path). Then the popularity of the 3D platformer began to wane as time went on, and especially as we got into the PS3/Xbox 360 era. But the digital marketplace created a venue for 2D indie platformers, then small budget revivals of old properties like Mega Man. Then Nintendo took the DS's hugely successful New Super Mario Bros. and made a Wii sequel, which outsold Mario Galaxy and really opened the floodgates. With the Switch, the home console/hand held divide no longer exists, games that would have been 3DS exclusive a few years ago are now home console games by default. In recent years we've seen a resurgence of 3D platformers too, and now the market seems to be at a comfortable place where both 2D and 3D platformers are viable, with each series staying in its wheelhouse. Kirby, Donkey Kong, Mega Man, and Yoshi are 2D. Crash, Spyro and Ratchet & Clank are 3D. Mario is the master of both. So why has the Sonic series been flailing along with poorly realised 3D games? Why have they been making so many games that switch back and forth between 2D and 3D, where the 2D sections don't quite function as a traditional Sonic game and the 3D sections don't quite function as a 3D platformer? Why the half-measures? The Mega Drive Sonic titles are probably the best selling games Sega has ever released, the most acclaimed in the series and the most ingrained in pop cuture and the collective consciousness, so why was a brand new one of those treated like a sideshow, when Nintendo rolls out the red carpet for a new 2D Mario, Kirby or Yoshi? If the sideshow outshines the main act, shouldn't it become the main act? As much as I'd love an innovative fully 3D Sonic game that really gets it right for the first time, or even an improved sequel to the Colours/Generations style gameplay, it just doesn't make sense that Sega has been going down this path for so long. The idea that the main games have to be 3D hasn't been true for the past decade. Why not stick to the thing that works, the thing that's popular, the thing the brand is best known for? Why not experiment with and prototype 3D Sonic behind the scenes, until they absolutely nail it, without the pressure of having to release a new one every 2-3 years?
The thing is, Sega could have gotten it right awhile ago. As far back as 2013 with Sonic Lost World. I say this as someone who loves 2D Classic Sonic the most, despite growing up with Adventure Sonic. The 2D gameplay style is going to get stale after awhile. Sonic Mania Was a masterful return to form, but we can't keep having every Sonic game just be like Sonic Mania for the next 10 years. Sonic Needs change things up, he needs to have a game that looks and feels like something of the new console generation. The problem is Sega just doesn't have the drive for it anymore. That's why they had Christian Whitehead and others on his team do everything for Sonic Mania. I don't even think anyone at in house Sega did anything for that game, design wise. It just seems like Sega (mainly Takashi Iizuka) just doesn't care these days. Why else would they make Sonic Forces the way that they did? Why else would they not listen to what the fans have been asking for years now? Why else would they be be putting everything else on the forefront these days, but leave Sonic hanging of a mainline game for 3 years? I don't know what else it could be, other than the fact that they just don't care.
