Sonic Superstars: A New 2D Sonic Game (Fall 2023)

After seeing how people reacted to that one site putting a Sonic 4 track in their Superstars footage, I imagine your hypothetical situation would've set the internet on fire.

 

If people were this obsessed over pixel art when Sonic Mania came out, maybe they would have kept the art style. Instead everyone only talked about it being a good game with accurate physics and fun level design. Can't blame Iizuka for choosing to prioritize that, lol.

Now that they change it, people say pixel art is the only good art style for Classic Sonic and lament its loss. "the grass is greener" syndrome, I guess.

But even when people say NSMB looks bland (and people say it a lot), I've never heard anyone say Mario should have stayed pixel art. Mario does "bland" art and it's "do better". Sonic does "bland" art and it's "they should never have changed it" and accusations of "laziness". Mario can evolve but Sonic can't. Mario is allowed to "fail" but Sonic can't even be simply really good and competent.

I genuinely can't see how anyone thinks Superstars looks "nasty". Thinking it's not amazing? Sure. Thinking Mania looks better? Absolutely. But Superstars looks better than most 2.5D games. And I'm not sure myself if SMBW looks better than Superstars or if the fact that it doesn't look like NSMB is bolstering my opinion. I enjoy Superstars' relative simplicity. I have my suspicions that SMBW may end up being too busy aesthetically (and mechanically).

 

No one is saying that Sonic has to be in pixel art to look good. I just don't like the aesthetic of Superstars. Everything looks like a cheap toy and there is some unpleasant 2010s style excessive bloom everywhere. I also don't like the colours in levels like the forest one. Looks really drab but hard to express.

The game might still end up being good and I will be getting it regardless.

A bit of nuance would be nice.

 

I can't decide whether I prefer the look of Sonic 4 Episode 2 (a previous 2D platformer with all-3D visuals) or Superstars.
The former had a bit more of a realistic artstyle going for it with some good looking backgrounds (White Park Zone especially!) and didn't use depth of field to blur it, while the latter is more cartoon-y, saturated and likes to use solid colours as well.
Both styles work for the games they are in, I'd say.

 

I half way agree with the reasoning. It did force them to get creative with things due to hardware limitations, which made things interesting. I think the bigger issue is that when that older hardware was around, games were like $50/60 dollars. Advanced hardware is here now, living costs have gone up over the years naturally (and unnaturally), and video games are still expected and being sold at $50/60 dollars.

Basically, there are a lot more factors than just the hardware limitation that stifled the visual styles, different types of game, levels of fidelity, etc. I'd wager it comes more to lower payed/understaffed crews that have to rely on "cheaper" methods.

 

I think both Sonic the Hedghog 4: Episode II and Sonic Superstars looks good visually.

 

Yeah I like Sonic 4 episode II’s visuals as well unlike most people. I didn’t care much for the animations. Sonic Superstars is even better. I think this is another case where you cannot satisfy every Sonic fan. Sonic games are not really known to stand out in visuals anyway. I haven’t seen a Sonic game that really stood out in that aspect since Sonic Generations. Every game after that looks similar. I go to Sonic games for the fun gameplay. I guess to each it’s own.

 

I was asking myself that question a while ago. I went back to look at Sonic 4 Ep 2 again and came away feeling like Sonic 4 did a better job -- in some places -- with its variety and lighting, even though it was generally a simpler, more repeated scene.

Sylvania Castle in particular demonstrates those 2 ends of my impression, looking both quite simplistic in its backgrounds in many places, yet also really just having more aesthetically pleasing pop (to me anyway) in many places too. The variety of the backgrounds you'd travel through, the nice detail on some of the badniks (the humming birds in particular), and the pretty sun and clouds.

Superstars' Bridge Island, in comparison, delivers so much more yet at the same time just doesn't manage to bring that same level of visual allure. For me anyway.

That said, I still see Superstars as easily more visually appealing _overall_, simply because the vast majority of Sonic 4 Ep 2 is very simplistic in comparison. So for me, when considering the whole package and playing through all of its scenery, not just its best bits, Sonic 4 Ep 2 loses out.

It's just that when it really does pop, in those few situations, it really pulls me in more than anything I've seen so far in Superstars.

 

Sonic 4 Episode 2 apes a lot more from Sonic 2 and 3's artstyle, which were less surreal, a little more grounded in realism, and with more fine detail (Sonic 3 especially).

Superstars is a lot more like Sonic 1 and CD with its repeated geometric patterns, solid colors, more simple geometry, and overall surreal and dreamlike nature. The game is also more cartoonish in general. Speed Jungle Zone in particular looks like it came straight out of Sonic CD. Makes sense when you consider who's at the forefront of this project.

 

Huh? I think a vast majority would absolutely love that.

 

I mean...

 

As an avid Rayman Legends defender, I definitely remember fending people off calling it shit for looking like a flash game they use to play for free on Newgrounds. There were also all the 3D complaints. I'm sure those same complaints would crop up again.
To this day, I have yet to find all these amazing high production value free flash games people claim exist.

 

Yeah exactly. Rayman Origins actually felt like a Sonic game sometimes with all the tricky momentum-based maneuvers I needed to pull-off.

I wish that editor/asset system were open to the public to mix with a gameplay engine.

 

May I ask, what even is Sonic’s art style? If we are so obsessed with how this game looks and that it’s wrong then how is it supposed to look? I think advance looks ugly as shit yet people rave how fitting it is for the series.
I think this looks closer to classic sonic than any of the handheld platformers between 2000-2017 (pre-mania).
The models themselves look fine. If that is the common complaint I implore all of you to look up shovelware on the 3ds then re-analyze sonic superstars models.

 

Sonic’s art style? That’s easy: whatever the art style of the Sonic games you played in elementary school was.

 

Sonic X for leapfrog leapster

 

May god have mercy on your soul

 

So the Switch version. Pro: it appears to run at 60 FPS.

Con: the graphics are noticeably downgraded beyond the resolution, with missing objects.

I think it still looks fine enough and it running at 60 FPS is nice, but if you've got an Xbox or PlayStation, maybe skip the Switch version.

 

Makes me wish I had one of those Steam Deck thing-a-ma-jigs all the cool kids are talking about these days so I could have the best of both worlds.

 

If you've got the cash and you're just wondering if it's worth it, I say go for it. Being able to play pretty much any Sonic you want, typically in their ideal forms, including fan games, all in one spot, is very very fun. And then there's everything else under the sun it can play too...