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

Really depends on how they set it up. Capcom preserved the aspect ratio in RE5.

​

World at War did something similar, except they added a background.

​

You could also say fuck it and just give people an ultrawide viewport like Capcom did with the RE5 PC Local Co-Op update.

​

Then there are games that go insane and have a dynamically switching shared space, a scaling camera shared space, horizontal and vertical split screen based on the conditions.

​

There are several options they could have gone with and Arzest picked the least creative one. Not much a surprise coming from Arzest though.

 

I feel like changing the aspect ratio of a 2D platformer changes much more how it plays than for a shooter, but nothing prevented them from using split-screen, they just didn't.

 

That's simply not true, but not a discussion worth derailing here as it delves into the TPS and FPS genres and their nuances. To put it short, it does have a significant effect.
Sonic's 2D outings have had people complaining about not being able to see shit. I don't think people would complain about an ultra wide view. In the case of Superstars, the viewport already changes anyways if you're playing co-op or single player. I don't think going ultrawide would hurt this game's design.

​

 

Ah this is sweet, especially the last solution. Yeah I'd take any of them.

 

Yeah the last one is cool and the earliest example I've seen it in use was on Sonic's home turf with Toejamand Earl on the Mega Drive.

Shortest video I could find that specifically shows it off but it has other cool examples. ​

 

When it comes to offline Sonic co-op (i.e. where are players in the same room, sharing the same screen), there is no perfect solution. Every solution will involve trade-offs and compromises.

With split screen co-op, the compromises are the least painful, and the player can usually learn to live with them. It is possible to have workarounds for the issues (e.g. if screen zooming is such a big issue, just let the player use the 2nd control stick to toggle zooming for their screen).

With all the other non-split screen solutions Sega has given us for co-op, the compromise is not having all players consistently on the screen, which is what stops the game from being fun. It's simply not fun to disappear off-screen. And it's even worse in a fast-paced game as Sonic where no sooner have you made your way back on screen, you'll fall off again. There's no point to playing.

The perfect shouldn't be the enemy of the good. Split screen may not be perfect, but it's good enough for a fun time and far better than anything else Sega has given us. And it is deeply frustrating how Sega won't use that and instead prefers their clever ideas that plainly don’t work.

 

I just plainly don’t think Sonic’s game/level design lends itself well to cooperative multiplayer. Split screen would end up with people just making their way through stages on their own for the most part and wouldn’t really feel like coop. On the other hand, the current implementation also leads to one player bulldozing ahead and the others barely playing or the best player has to play super stop and go to let the others catch up.

Like @big smile says, there are compromises with each. I think Sonic Team and Arzest probably tested all of these and decided that they prefer players to kind of feel like they’re playing together even if it’s a bit more annoying on a moment-to-moment gameplay sense. There’s no perfect option.

…except for the Chaotix tether

 

Tangential to the split-screen discussion, how many here have played the multiplayer in the Advance games? You each get the full viewport, while also no longer being tethered together. Advance 1 & 2 had only traditional 1-4P race modes, but Advance 3 allows you to play the entire story in co-op. I would love for Sega to return to this idea. Mania Plus allows 4 player races, and I hope that with the Retro Engine decomps, the other games somehow get roped into a single multiplayer mod.

The fact that Super Stars has a crappy online mode, but lacks any sort of way to play the regular stages together online boggles my mind in current year.

 

The best implementation of co-op in Sonic in '06 multiplayer, and there's a good reason nobody remembers that. It's your basic "single player campaign but with gates that require 2 players to simultaneously hit switches to progress". I would like to play a Sonic game with decent co-op, but I have no idea how it could realistically be accomplished. Superstars really makes no effort to actually achieve it.

Advance 3's co-op is also absolutely crap. The best way to describe it is to say that it's like an MMO with only 2 people online. Huge world, no reason to interact.

 

I definitely think that true co-op, where you have a shared experience of working together, probably wouldn't work in Sonic, as all the co-operative mechanisms would slow down the speed.

I think the series should instead aim for 'friendly racing': It should be like Sonic 2's 2PVS where whoever gets the most points 'wins', it's just that all players get to take part in story mode, beat the bosses and collect the emeralds. (And I use "win" in the loosest sense. It should be up to players to decide if they want to compete, or if they just want to explore the levels together at their own pace).

So the question is, why not just stick with 2PVS?
The reason is that 2PVS is often a watered down version of the main game. It's annoying when you have two or more Sonic fans who want to play together, but can't enjoy the full experience of progressing through the story or beating bosses or seeing all the stages.

So co-op should really just be about taking the best aspects of 2PVS, but in a way that lets players experience the full game.

I think it's better for the series to strive for providing a way for friends/siblings to play together rather than work together. Granted, it's not going to be as fun as playing another type of game which is designed for true co-op. But it will still offer a fun time for friends/siblings to share Sonic together, which is good enough.

 

"It's not real co-op"
"There's no reason to interact"

Setting aside that this conversation always causes some really pedantic arguments about what is and isn't "real" co-op, nobody suggesting split-screen as a solution cares about these points; call it whatever makes you feel better, we still want what we want. I've never played Advance 3's multiplayer, but I can say based on playing other games that doing my shit in a huge world with a chance that I'll come across my buddy isn't the flaw it's being framed as. Like I've said before:

Nevermind how fun it could be to try and keep pace with each other, without someone just being de-spawned if they fall behind. Or deciding to race each other to the boss. Or deciding to split the labor on farming Rings for the robot part shop, or on searching for Giant Rings.

Who knows what else I'm not thinking of that players could do during parallel play. Add it to the list of things Sonic games (could) do to facilitate emergent play.

-

That aside, do the 4 player 2D Mario games have "real co-op" or "reasons to interact" besides sending someone to their death because you jumped on them over a pit? Does jumping off of someone's head give you an extra boost, basically turning other players into impromptu platforms? Genuine question, only played them single player.

 

Not 2D, but Super Mario 3D World, your score is tallied at the end of each level, and the winner is given a crown to wear for the next level, which can be knocked off and fought over. Similarly, Mario Kart 8 also gives a crown to the players Mii in the online lobby. It's not much, but it's a simple enough incentive to want to "win" a level.

 

I did, and I enjoyed it immensely. I was hoping Stupidstars would be more like that instead of an NSMB knock off.

Speaking for myself, I'm not asking for perfect solutions, I'm asking for logical options. You have a game where the playable characters have the capability to zoom past each other and the level design has so many routes that you can split up. Split the screen, make a dynamically scaling camera, offer console link or online play. Offer anything.

The "real" co-op discussion is also baffling to me. A vast majority of the best co-op games out there aren't even "real", whatever that means. They just add an additional playable character and bloat some values to accommodate. The fun comes from just having another human to play the same game together. One of the best co-op games I love is Harmony of Despair, and that game regularly splits you apart in huge levels.

​

Is there a meaningful reason for the split? Not really. Party A and Party B can reach the end of most stages without ever needing to interact or cross paths. The co-op combat is the same as Contra just an extra guy shooting.

Monster Hunter is another hugely popular franchise that has co-op from the start and to this day the only meaningful co-op interaction you can have is equipping/slotting a specific ability that allows you to share a percentage of your consumable effects with your parry. It's either that or play Hunting Horn for party buffs, a weapon that has always ranked in the bottom 5. Other than that, all you do is gang up on the same monster. You can't even trade items.

Like I said before, the fun is just sharing the same experience. Playing RE5 with AI Sheva is nowhere near the same as playing it on a Discord call and then kazz stomps in your direction demanding an egg. Superstars co-op does not offer you the same experience of playing a Sonic game. It gives you a shackle down mess.

 

I totally agree with Chimpo. I love playing coop games, specially platforming ones. There aren't that many awesome examples, but the games that work are FUN.

Usually you either have splitscreen, camera options, a single screen or online coop.

Games on a single screen usually are slower paced and involve more combat (NSMB, Rayman Origins/Legends, Bubble Booble, Spelunky, Broforce, World of Illusion...). It could work with Sonic, but it would probably require either slower speed or not having loopings/ramps... Then there's Chaotix with the ring tether. You all say it's awful, but have you tried with a friend? It's far from the best coop game, but it's miles better than playing with Miles in Sonic 2/3.

Camera options would mean being able to see more of the map with the controller. I can't think of many more examples than Castlevania Harmony of Despair, but it's one of my favorite games for its generation. I've replayed the game easily x6 times restarting all the grinding. I tried back in the day to make a Sonic fangame like it, but I didn't know how to implement online gameplay... I don't get why there aren't more clones, I have played hundreds of games, and I still think it's one of the best coop experiences I've ever had in a platforming game. The drawback are that levels shouldn't be huge and you need a lighter engine to draw on screen more objects while zoomed out.

So basically you end up with splitscreen or online coop as the main options, as the other two wouldn't work without reworking the gameplay/engine.

With that said, SRB2 is the best coop experience I've had in a Sonic game by far. Which is just that: Splitscreen/online coop.

"But you are not cooperating". That depends with who you play. If you really are playing coop, you coop with the other player (you go here I go there, help me get there, let's beat the boss together...). And my favorite: Coop moves. In classic Sonic there could be many ways to help each other (Tails could carry other players, Knuckles gliding or climbing too, Amy's hammer could send you flying...). You just need moves that involves two players and interesting level layouts.

I haven't played Superstars, but it seems that the developer didn't focus in single or coop mode. It just looked at NSMB and thought "let's make that". And like most modern Sonic games that just follow the trend (and too late) it's just meh/good. Games are awesome when the developer actually ENJOYS their game. but sadly, that doesn't seem to happen a lot with main Sonic games since Unleashed/Colors/Generations, the racing Sumo games and Mania.

 

I've always wanted to play Kirby and the Amazing Mirror co-op, and that lets all four players wander off into entirely different levels. I'm game to co-exist in pretty much anything that won't get ruined by horrific desync.

 

Just replayed through Superstars beginning to end over the course of the past few days, just out of curiosity. A few thoughts:

1) The game really does understand classic Sonic level design well. Does it elevate it to Mania standards? Fuck no, but the people at Arzet made a game that has a great sense of flow to it that stands alongside, and higher than the Genesis games at times

2) The production values were clearly rushed. Some levels have fantastic visuals, others look like shit. Some have banger songs, while others have ass ones.

3) The story makes no sense? I don’t care I guess, but also like why even have a story at that point? Why did they build up Trip as a villain in marketing, when in the game itself she’s just a bumbling idiot until she isn’t?

It feels like they really wanted this game out in a rush, which is so stupid because the release date they chose was within days of a brand new 2D Mario. If they let this cook a few months to a year it could’ve been great.

 

Despite the many issues Sonic Superstars had, it really felt like Arzest WANTED to do a Classic Sonic game.

 

It's a minor thing but it's spelled Arzest. :P

But yeah, I feel like the spirit was definitely there. There was definitely an effort made. Sure, Mania's better- but this was definitely nothing like Sonic 4, and I'm tired of some people pretending it was. Its worst issue is its long, drawn-out boss battled with poor tells and repetitive cycles. That, and the Fang chase fight lasts literally as long as an actual level... And yeah, the music is hit-or-miss, which is really disappointing.

 

The game feels like a hodgepodge of a commissioned “okay, someone please make us a 2D Sonic!” what with the lackluster production values and some weird reused gimmicks, but the level design and gamefeel is like mostly on point. It doesn’t have Mania’s spirit, but it clearly stands next to the classics where it counts.

I think it should be remembered as apart of the same series as the classics more than any 2D game that came out after 3&K. The Advance & Rush games are completely different experiences than the classics, and anything else either was an obvious spinoff or sucked ass.

 

RE: Coop Sonic game design. I think the solution is to acknowledge that he players will rarely physically interact. Instead of trying to force them to by keeping them on the same screen or rubber banding them together, design mechanics that allow them to interact in non-physical ways. For example, allow players to send powerups to eachother, or something like that. You could also incentivize, but not force them, with mechanics like Tails' picking up another player ability. Also maybe (and it's a big maybe) you could do the ol' Toejam and Earl style of splitscreen, i.e. the screen only splits when you're not near eachother, though you'd need to make it extremely snappy as to not break the flow.