Discussion in 'General Sonic Discussion' started by Willie, Mar 29, 2012.
I read this as:
The current 10-minute time limit is useless, but a proper one is intended to be part of the fun- it adds pressure and encourages you to perform well. You brought up Super Mario 3D Land earlier; some of the later special world stages are excellent examples of that. You have 30 seconds, which won't get you through the level. Period. You need to get from time pickup to time pickup, and as fast as you can, because each one only adds a measly 10 seconds to the clock. You're free to say you don't enjoy it, but a well-considered (not ten minutes long) time limit is a conscious game design choice, and if it doesn't mesh with you you should probably just play something more suited to your tastes.
Or demand games be more like the very much legitimate and canon Advance games, letting me turn it off.
There are more things I like about Sonic than "herp derp challenge hardcore pro endboss being cool"
It is not the only purpose of games.
Fucking Christ I love you so much, you're my fucking hero right now.
I get fed up with people who are too closed-minded to see gaming as anything but a fun challenge; partly because I think they're full of shit (I bet none of them would have played Sonic if all the mechanics were the same but they controlled a red circle in black and white environments) and partly because they never seem to get gaming's other appeals. Gaming is not just a sport, it stopped being "just" a challenge the very SECOND artists got involved with it. Now it's much, much, MUCH MORE.
Honestly, as cool as the surreal environments are, most Sonic characters are kinda awful! Sonic himself is a decent cartoon character, but most of the rest are mediocre at best; I'd be fine with replacing them with abstracts!
Not sure where that came from. Personally, I like the character designs that are mediocre more than the ones that aren't. At least (classic) Tails LOOKS like a fox, at least Cream LOOKS like a rabbit, at least Marine LOOKS like a raccoon, the abstract ones annoy me, but that's a different topic.
It's a bit more than just how characters look, hell, it's even a bit more than how environments look, at least to me, but I feel like I'm getting into a territory I cannot possibly make sense in, even to the most attentive listener.
I don't care for it. The 10 minute time limit is far too long for someone who knows what they're doing, and easily forgettable until you just want to screw around/hit the casino night barrel.
I'm fine with the presence of a timer that cuts off at 10 minutes: It functions as a sort of stop watch for people who really do want to speed-run the level, or just see if they can complete the level more efficiently than their last run. I just don't think it should result in a death. A score reduction would be just fine.
Also holy shit, I think some people on this board clamoring for harder limits and damning the casual (hate that word) audience need to remember people other than die-hard Sonic fans who know the ins and outs of level design and mechanics might enjoy/want to try playing Sonic games. You need some accessibility to get popularity and sales.
10 minutes is a very lenient time limit for Sonic standards. I never bothered to care about it.
Oldfags have always bitched about newfags and I've never found crankier oldfags anywhere else but Retro. Seriously, all half the community does is bitch and moan because games are too easy and casuals play them and kids won't get off their lawn half the time, it disgusts me because they disregard my reason for playing video games, which I feel is a valid reason. Like I mentioned earlier, a lot of games I really enjoy are piss-easy, so it is physically, humanly possible to like games for other reasons than challenge. Imagine that!
One thing I liked about the original Spyro was that the flying levels were timed, but once you beat them the first time, the timer counted up instead of down. I spent so much time in them flying around, feeling relaxed and pretending to really be a dragon. I thought that was a very fair reward for my efforts.
I don't even notice the time limit; I've just never died from a time-over in a Sonic game. In fact, I remember bumming around in Sonic CD trying to find the generators, and even then during those times I don't think I ever went beyond the 8-minute mark, and Sonic CD's the only Sonic game where I've ever spent large amounts of time in a level.
I bet the time limit came from Mario, when they were taking ideas from it to compete against it. It probably just stuck as something to have, even though it really serves no purpose other than to be annoying.
The time limit has only ever been a problem in Carnival Night and Sandopolis, and that was back when I was a stupid kid who didn't know any better.
It really is just... there. Hardly an essential thing, and none of the games gain anything from including it. It's pointless but harmless.
The timer doesn't really bother me. I don't think it needs to be in, but it should be allowed to turn it on for those who like such a thing.
I only quote this post because I was going to bring up Mario myself.
Really, it depends on the genre of the game in question. I suppose I must be one of these "oldfags" that someone (I won't say who) has been bitching about, but then that might be because I played games like Super Mario Bros. (and 2, 3, World, etc.) and Gauntlet where some sort of time limit could end your current life/game. Then again, I also enjoyed The Legend of Zelda, but that's why I mentioned that about genres before. Also, games across almost all genres have gotten easier through the years. Why I remember playing Dragon Warrior and Final Fantasy and you didn't have this namby-pamby bullshit of saving everywhere. The later Final Fantasy games had a good medium: you could save on the overworld but not in the 'dungeons' unless you were in a special area. Old adventure games actually had dead-end paths if you didn't get the right item or other such situation and you could just wander around the game in frustration.
Also, if we're going to be complaining about something killing you if you dicked around for too long (and a perfect illustration of older games being harder), "Rat Race" from Battletoads, anyone? Or one-hit deaths in Contra?
Yes, I find myself agreeing with those that can't make the time limit just need practice. Not every game can be easy, you know?
This is interesting because with how cinematic Sega was going with the franchise a few years ago, you would think that they would do what Capcom did with Megaman and get rid of all this extra baggage especially since the ridiculously still time limit and fucking ranking system (though incredibly lenient nowadays) only push them to make the blandest straight lines ever seen since this side of Crash Bandicoot.
I appreciate challenge. I love challenging games in fact. But I have to admit that the timer has been pointless for a long time and if you want challenge then demand specific tailored challenges (or earn the right to explore every nook and cranny by completing the main game, I am a little indifferent on either). But man, a lot of people are acting as if you who are advocating a time limitless game are asking for a damn Super Guide. I am indifferent to points, times, and ranks. Sometimes I would like to enjoy a game without pressure while still doing whatever conventions haven't been made obsolete.
You completely missed the point of my posts, and I'm assuming you're talking about me, in which case I'm not sure if you're trying to be nice by not pointing it out directly or trying to be rude by not acknowledging me, but it's not about being "easy" or "hard" all the god damn time.
But if it really bothers you, how about a difficulty setting in games? Minecraft has a mode where you can basically turn off monsters if you don't feel like dealing with them and I approve of that, although I mostly play on normal mode for the atmosphere of the game. (Keyword being "atmosphere, which isn't always related to challenge.)
Edit: I do not have anything against people who like a challenge, I have something against people who can't appreciate that not everybody wants that out of a video game, and I see a FUCKLOAD of that here.
It's almost certainly borrowed from Mario; 80% of the rest of Sonic's game mechanics are.
And that's another reason why I dislike the time limit (as it has traditionally been implemented in Sonic) - along with the score, it seems to have been thrown in with very little thought, and has never really been re-thought since.
Take Yoshi's Island, for example (the first Super Mario platformer game to be released post-Sonic, and almost certainly influenced by it). There's no time limit at all; when the game wants to put the pressure on you, they have chase sequences, rising/falling blocks, auto-scrolling areas, or unstable platforms. Other levels let you explore to your heart's content with no pressure.
That's an example of legitimately good, thoughtful design. Instead of slapping on a cheap global feature with no thought to how it might affect individual areas (as in Sonic 3, where a 10:00 limit means nothing in Angel Island but can be sorely felt in Carnival Night), each challenge in the game is presented in the best possible way, just like a director presenting each scene in a film. Surely there's room in the Sonic franchise to take these cues, rather than adhering to a holdover from the arcade era.
And there's a similar story with Score in Yoshi's Island. It's rethought to be a hugely important aspect of gameplay, interwoven with exploration (finding coins, flowers) and challenge (don't get hit too much) in a brilliant and satisfying way. And it rewards you with the greatest reward a game can give: bonus levels. But in Sonic? It's just vestigial.
I'm not crusading against the time limit here. But when - from a design perspective - these gameplay concepts are questioned instead of taken for granted, you can forge interesting new territory. Now, that's interesting to me primarily as a game designer (with a specific focus on Sonic) but might bore the hell out of others.
I think it's not just the time limit and score, either. Sonic game development seems to be plagued with safe, inside-the-box thinking, especially from Sega themselves. While Mario and Mega Man have healthy diversity, exploring all kinds of new gameplay and level environments, Sonic games seem to be stuck in a cookie cutter loop. It's almost as though the series is afraid of losing its identity if it doesn't recapitulate all of the tired tropes, and this carries over to the fan community, as well. I'm speaking largely from ignorance on this next point, so correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think there's nearly as much of a trend towards remaking in other communities; there's no Mario 2 HD.
I'm still waiting for Sonic to grow up and become vital again, from a design perspective. But I think I've strayed way too far from the topic of the time limit.
Just a heads up on the people who want to explore Sonic 3K with no time limit, I hacked S3k. You can get it here.
I'd be fine with a difficulty setting. I'm just sort of a person who does want a little challenge and the post was more me reminiscing than anything else, along with a little observation about gaming trends.
Awesome, I will check this out later. :D
I understand there's a shitton of handholding in newer games - Skyward Sword comes to mind with all the talking Fi did and how pointless the dowsing gimmick was - but I can't think of new games' handholding without thinking of OoT3D, a game which I not only enjoy, but which has THE most pointless, cheap kind of handholding ever - a freaking stone that tells you how to solve a puzzle. I disdain that stone, I never use it, but at the same time, I was only required to notice it one time, it is not obtrusive, and I never have to use it, so I do not mind it being in the game even though I'm amazed it even had to be.
However, after even considering the insult that stone posed to me, I remembered that I have quite a few friends that have confided in me that puzzle games "Make them feel stupid" and they are just not very good at them, so if someone really needs the stone to tell them the answer, more power to them. (I guess Nintendo figured they're just cutting out the middle man with walkthroughs anyway.) Now, I can completely sympathize with a lack of interest in handholding when it's literally unavoidable. A good example being the Harvest Moon games for the Wii. You cannot skip the tutorial, which is annoying enough, but what used to take one virtual day off your first Spring now needs to spread itself out over the span of a week, either because Natsume was worried about the accessibility of a game like Harvest Moon or because there is so much to do in a game like Harvest Moon, or both, I don't know, but what I do know is, I don't need it. I'm not bashing people who do, I don't want to take away the possibility that vital information they needed to know might be in those tutorials, but why the hell can't I turn them off? That really drives me insane.
Although on a different subject, I might as well say that, if I'm playing a Sonic game like what I assume most people play a Sonic game, I almost never time out, although Sonic 3 gave me a lot of trouble as a kid, it's not really that I can't play the game, it's just that sometimes, I outright don't want to leave a certain area for whatever reason, usually because, for varying reasons, it makes me feel good to be there. I realize this wasn't really all that intentional in earlier games, and in some newer ones, but it just kind of mystifies me that a lot of people have never considered this before. A lot of the thread's previous pages seem to be people who are blaming the disdain for a time limit on people just sucking, but I just have to wonder at what some of them think about when they think about video games.
I attempted to get people to elaborate, but apparently that didn't really work.
And yeah I know my posts are long. It's difficult to abridge posts for me. -.-
You seem to have a lot to say on this, why not make a thread with your observations?
Separate names with a comma.