Would You Rather A Modern Or Classic Style Game For The 30th Anniversary Game

Discussion in 'General Sonic Discussion' started by MagnusTheGreen, Apr 21, 2021.

  1. BadBehavior

    BadBehavior

    Member
    205
    49
    28
    And that's interesting because what you see as revisionism to bring back certain elements, I see as re-evaluation of those elements removed from the emotional hype and backlash. Same for what you see as what you enjoy as being deconstructed and pushed back against, I see as rightfully taking a critical eye at certain elements when removed from the hype.

    I'd hate feeling other people can't enjoy a thing, but it's like Azookara says: we're at an impasse. My insane one in a trillion idea for breaking the deadlock is to get Evening Star making the next 3D game. Modern fans buy it cos it's 3D, Classic fans buy it cos it's got Taxman's name on it. Winner winner chicken dinner.
     
  2. Laura

    Laura

    Brightened Eyes Member
    989
    223
    43
    England
    My main issue when people say "Sonic Adventure has aged" is that they rarely define what they mean by a game 'aging' or specifically set out how it has aged.

    I think there's two main aspects of a game aging.

    1 - The controls, feel, and core gameplay.
    2 - The design and structure of the game's levels and overarching story mode.

    I think Mario 64 suffers the most from No 1 and Sonic Adventure(s) suffer most from No 2.

    I find Mario 64 hard to go back to because I've played Mario Galaxy and Odyssey and both control and play far better than 64. I know that's not a fair complaint (I do like Mario 64 and I know it's an old game), but it's also just true. I played Mario 64 and Mario Odyssey back to back on Switch and the difference is astonishing. But when it comes to the general level design and star objectives, I think the game actually held up well. And while maybe a strange comparison, I think Zelda OoT and MM were very similar (controls and combat mechanics wonky compared to BoTW but I actually far preferred the dungeons, story, and world map of the N64 games).

    When it comes to the Sonic Adventure titles I think the gameplay and controls have actually not been surpassed. A problem here is in Adventure 2, where the mechs control more stiffly (which is a subjective point I guess). But putting that aside, Sonic Heroes was worse, Sonic 06 was awful, and the Boost Sonic games are almost like an entirely different game series (as much I love Generations). There have been general improvements in 3D platformers and the Sonic Adventure games miss out on QoL improvements (better camera, collision, etc), but I think the core gameplay and Sonic's movement actually holds up very well. Maybe it's in large part because Sonic's movement in 3D hasn't improved like Mario, but it's something I notice. And I'm aware people think Sonic controls like a slippery mess in Adventure, but I just don't see it, sorry.

    Where I think the Sonic Adventure games have aged is in their structure and design. Especially Adventure 1, which has you repeating bosses and dull mini-games across different stories. The levels are often barely fleshed out for characters like Knuckles and Gamma. In Adventure 2 they are more fleshed out but are made more tedious. The bosses are usually poor and the hub world in Adventure 1 is pretty pointless. To be honest I also think Adventure 1 and 2 have more than their fair share of dud levels.

    So when Sonic Adventure's level design is good, like in the game's best action stages, I think that's where the game shines, because the core gameplay is just so enjoyable.
     
  3. Aerosol

    Aerosol

    FML and FU2 Moderator
    10,701
    119
    43
    Not where I want to be.
    Sonic (?): Coming summer of 2055...?
    I find this interesting. I can see all the complaints about Sonic Adventure and it's ilk: the dodgy camera, shitty controls, etc etc. I just don't care because I'm good at the game as is and enjoy it just fine. Same with games that even WE think control like shit like Heroes and Shadow. I can see it, I acknowledge the criticism. I just don't care.
     
  4. gold lightning

    gold lightning

    Member
    497
    4
    18
    There's also the aspect of how SADX shat all over the visuals and created many more collision issues that people have ran into over the years. Because that's the most widespread and accessible version, we might never know just how much it's just SADX that's to blame for many people saying SA1 "aged poorly". I mean, some elements aged poorly no matter what (the animation comes to mind), but SADX took the game's issues to another level.
     
  5. Mana

    Mana

    Good! Great! Awesome! Outstanding! Amazing! Member
    336
    66
    28
    You kept saying 64 has aged like wine when it's problems become harder to ignore by the year, in my opinion. If you enjoy Adventure over 64, I couldn't get it from your words. My bad.
     
  6. Myles_Zadok

    Myles_Zadok

    IDK Member
    46
    10
    8
    *Forgets I posted 2 days ago that apparently helped start the discussion of whether or not Mania should be a side thing, the main focus, or equal focus for the series going forward, and now we're talking about whether Sonic Adventure aged well for some reason.*

    I never played Sonic Adventure until a year ago, and I actually enjoyed it. While a lot of changes were made that make it feel less like a "Classic" game, it still retains some of that charm in a way I don't really know how to explain, before Sonic Adventure 2 eliminated that charm (but I like SA2, don't get me wrong).

    Adventure has aged poorly, but judging it in the context of the time, I think it's pretty great. I didn't find the problems and glitches all that bothersome, tbh. I actually think a remake that fixed all of the bugs and glitches and cutscenes would be received decently well. But Sega would probably never do it, so...

    Going back to the original question, while I would love a Classic game that follows up on Mania, I'm more interested to see what Sega has next for Modern Sonic. My gut feeling is that they'll make another boost game, but the level design will be more open.
     
  7. Azookara

    Azookara

    yup Member
    Amusingly I think SA1 would be less criticized today if it just had one version, haha.

    We'd be looking at it more as a comparison to the PS1/N64 platformers than PS2/Gamecube, since Dreamcast itself was the bridge of those eras. I imagine if Crash or Spyro had releases in the early 00s stuck in late 90s sensibilities / execution we would've probably got similar responses... hey, wait a minute.
     
    Last edited: Apr 30, 2021
  8. Hanging Waters

    Hanging Waters

    Member
    175
    59
    28
    US
    I can understand others' issues with the modern route, but I don't think that's a good enough reason to say nothing the series gas introduced since the year 2000 can be salvaged at all (I know most aren't suggesting that, but to those who are I am giving you an irl frown right now).

    To say nothing is salvageable is absolutely wild, considering that through so much of the series history fans have been saying "if you just took this and tweaked it a little you'd be golden". Bad execution is never a reason to dismiss a good concept, and SEGA have shown themselves completely capable of executing an amazing concept in such a way that the game is still trash (look at Sonic 4 vs Sonic Mania, they aim to do a lot of the same things and SEGA's is the garbage one).

    I agree with @Josh in that - in my eyes - the much EASIER route would be to capitalize on a formula that has clearly already worked, and continues to work. They have a blueprint right in front of them telling them how to make a decent Sonic game, and they have tons of fans and critics vocally telling them how they could make it a GREAT sonic game (more original content, adapt some old tropes to be more fun in the modern age of gaming). Likewise, it is a little frustrating when people dismiss the classic formula's recent success as mere rehash-ery and want to force the series into a self-destructive retrograde.

    That being said, I separate that vision of the series from a true modern direction. When I say I think modern Sonic can easily still be successful, I'm not saying "let's keep doing more if this shit that didn't work", I'm saying they should really sit down and have a hard think about why their shitty execution will inevitably lead to every game being mediocre or a little above average, regardless of which formula they're going with. They keep reinventing the wheel instead of just fixing the spokes. Or worse, they cut the wheel in half and set it on fire and say "maybe we'd be better off without wheels!" and that just makes absolutely no sense.

    Also, modern Sonic has gone in so many absolutely BUCK wild directions that I think we all gotta remember... when people say they're down for a new modern Sonic game, the only thing you can really gather from that statement is "I'm down to see a game featuring the character Modern Sonic". And idc what anyone says, I think that character's design is SOLID, and I'd love to see them finally do something really GREAT with the egg they've been sitting on for 23 years. Lol.
     
    Last edited: Apr 30, 2021
  9. Aerosol

    Aerosol

    FML and FU2 Moderator
    10,701
    119
    43
    Not where I want to be.
    Sonic (?): Coming summer of 2055...?
    I don't see how which game I enjoy more is at all relevant to the point I was making but apology accepted I suppose.
     
  10. Mana

    Mana

    Good! Great! Awesome! Outstanding! Amazing! Member
    336
    66
    28
    Not once have you even acknowledged that to some people 64 hasn't aged the best, but okay.
     
  11. Linkabel

    Linkabel

    Member
    691
    158
    43
    Arizona
    I think another thing people forget about the attitude the public and critics have towards Mario 64 and Sonic Adventure is their time of release.

    Even though there were games like Alpha Waves and Jumping Flash, Mario 64 was the first big 3D platformer. And the thing that makes it stand the test of time a bit more is that they got so many things right on the first try.

    Sonic Adventure on the other hand came out during a time where there was already a 3D platformer scene.

    Even though it was well received a lot of its flaws were more noticeable because there was already examples of what to do and what not do in 3D platformers. and it was on a more powerful hardware.

    It doesn't help that 3D Mario has been more consistent and raised the bar with each release while 3D Sonic has struggled, so this has also retroactively contributed to the perception of 64 and SA and their legacies.
     
  12. Mario gets a pass for a LOT of things due to the fact that the series just has that much goodwill going for it. Nintendo may miss every now and then, but they've had far more hits than misses.

    Mario 64 may not have aged gracefully either, but it also paved the way for every platformer after and Nintendo have consistently built on the foundation established by it.

    Hard to call out 64 for its design flaws when Nintendo have long since addressed them.


    By comparison, Sonic Adventure came out when platformers were already well established, and the game kind of intentionally went against the grain and included many elements not really found in a platformer. Its inherently more divisive.

    For the record, that's always how Sonic has been. Its hard to understand given we're all Sonic fans, but Mario is much more ubiquitous and Sonic intentionally subverts many elements established by Mario. Sonic is inherently divisive for better or worse.
     
  13. Frostav

    Frostav

    Member
    405
    113
    43
    This is a completely pointless statement, but SA2B actually did radically change how Chao worked and it's by far the most extensive change from the DC version so they did change some stuff :V

    I don't have much else to say but I will state that Mario really really coasts on celebrity status in the gaming world. The first console I ever got was a Gamecube, and the first games I ever had for it were Sunshine and SA2B.

    One of these games was a truly miserable slog with an absolutely god-awful camera, pointless story, bad voice acting, and insufferably hard or obnoxious missions/stages where it felt like the game either wasn't working right or the game designers actively were trying to fuck you over. Even as a kid, I remember thinking the game was actively unfun 80% of the time and I still have PTSD from some of the most truly terrible levels I have ever seen in a video game.

    The other was Sonic Adventure 2 Battle :V

    SEGA really was lucky: Nintendo released a mainline Mario game so incredibly fucking bad that it basically made a new generation of Sonic fans!
     
  14. The Joebro64

    The Joebro64

    SAY HELLO TO MY CHOCOLATE BLEND Member
    1,243
    473
    63
    Nah, I'd much rather play Sunshine over SA2. I mean, both are definitely a step down from their predecessors and have terrible stories, voice acting, and cameras, but Sunshine is far more consistent and doesn't make you spend 45 minutes of doing stuff that has nothing to do with the spirit of the franchise before actually getting to the good stuff. Sunshine is a pretty good game with some rough edges, whereas SA2 mixes 1/3 of greatness with 2/3 of fluff that's rarely fun. And plus, Sunshine's successors actively solved its issues, whereas SA2's successors just doubled down on them and brought us to Shadow and '06.

    Mario has just enjoyed the consistency that Sonic hasn't had since the Genesis days.
     
  15. Frostav

    Frostav

    Member
    405
    113
    43
    Props to you but Sunshine is filled with so many truly terrible missions I can't see it. The blooper mission where you can't get off it so you have to blindly leap to the shine and you die if you miss. The sand bird. The mirror bullshit before the sand bird. The Wiggler bossfight where the boss can just avoid the areas that let you damage him for minutes. The watermelon rolling shine. The manta ray. The chuckster, pachinko and poison water lily secrets. The corona mountain boat. That's just off the top of my head.

    There are so many bad ones it's actually incredibly, frankly. Mad Space or Security Hall have nothing on this conga line of misery.

    And I'm personally of the opinion that the post-SA2 3D Sonics didn't double down on SA2's bad parts--rather they just did something completely different that was actively worse. There's a reason why SA1 and 2 are considered their own unique duology in terms of gameplay and design. Heroes shifted gears quite heavily for the worse and the following games kept on that train (even the Boost games' love for speedy hallways and gimmicky movesets padded with moves that exist solely to pass quasi-QTE's started with Heroes).
     
  16. Overlord

    Overlord

    Now playable in Smash Bros Ultimate Moderator
    18,149
    317
    63
    Berkshire, England
    Learning Cymraeg
    "Spammers will be spammed, flamers will be flamed, and Sonic Adventure will be glitched." -- Sonic the Hedgehog Area 51 Message Board's General Discussion subforum description, late 2001/early 2002 (WELL before SA:DX came out). SA1 DC has many camera and collision issues, that were pointed out and gently mocked in the fandom at the time, even without introducing SA:DX into the equation. And I speak as someone who bought a Dreamcast explicitly to play the damn thing.
     
  17. Metalwario64

    Metalwario64

    Member
    125
    37
    28
    I absolutely love Sunshine, despite the really rough edges (much in the way that I still love the Adventure games), but there are lots of people I have seen over the years who consider FLUDD entirely against the spirit of Mario platforming, though I myself have always loved the movement and tricks FLUDD allowed in the game, something that wasn't really matched until I guess Odyssey (though I haven't played it yet, but I hear Mario has a large moveset in that one). But I've definitely seen people who feel that everything with FLUDD is bad and the only "good" parts are the "secret" levels where you are forced to go without FLUDD (and even then, I've seen a lot of people complain about the platforming physics in those levels).
     
  18. Sui Eel

    Sui Eel

    captan Member
    I don't personally have a hang up on whether or not it's classic or adventure or boost or what have you.

    I just want something that can be (mostly) universally seen as good for once.
     
  19. DigitalDuck

    DigitalDuck

    Arriving four years late. Member
    4,972
    140
    43
    Lincs, UK
    TurBoa, S1RL
    I thought Mario 64 was shit when I played it in the late 90s. My opinion hasn't changed.

    (love Galaxy 2 though)
     
  20. Wraith

    Wraith

    Member
    25
    6
    3
    I have a hard time seeing Mario 64 as dated. A thing that dates a game for me is a feeling of being obsolete and I actually rarely get that feeling from Mario games. They usually try pretty hard to make themselves stand out so that there's always something exclusive to it that you'll want to experience it again. Most of the problems I have with it now are the exact same things I thought were wrong when I first played it. The same thing applies to Sonic Adventure, though I was a little younger then so I didn't realize many of them while playing.

    Mario 64 has always been more valuable than most 3D platformers to me because it has the most focus on the pure joy of movement with practically nothing else getting in the way of that. It's even more focused on this purity than the other Mario games, which implement gimmicks and interruptions that sacrifice some of that purity for something else. Sunshine has a similar structure but the water pump changes the risk/reward of the whole act of jumping around and slowed down the pacing in a way that turned me off.

    And here's the thing: I don't think any of the Mario games were wrong to take that approach. It's suddenly a lot harder for one new entry to render the rest of the line obsolete if they each have some things you can't get anywhere else. Much as I prefer galaxy over Sunshine, they're not really trying for the same thing, thus you can't really argue to a Sunshine fan that they should just play Galaxy instead or anything like that. They couldn't be further apart, philosophically. Maybe you could say Odyssey finally solved Sunshine's issues but I wouldn't even agree there. Mario Odyssey has a lot of similar concepts, but it's like a completely different vibe with it's own host of issues, only a few of which overlap with Sunshine imo. It's a much better game than Sunshine for sure but it's not a replacement.

    A thing that dates a game for me more than anything else is simply having a better options but Nintendo never let Mario cover it's own tracks like that. This sounds like their usual arthouse thought process but it makes a lot of business sense too since now they have 6 Mario games they can sell you forever instead of one. You might as well not even bother with Uncharted: Drakes Fortune at this point because Among Thieves exists, but Mario 64 is still the only Mario 64. To me, Nintendo has tackled a lot of Mario 64's weaknesses but it hasn't really built on it's strengths so I'll probably never get to the point where I don't really want to touch it anymore.

    TLDR: Mario 64 isn't timeless because they built on that foundation, it is because they didn't.

    Sonic Adventure is kind of in a similar boat for me where I haven't played much else like it since it came out. It doesn't really feel dated to me because there's nothing trying to date it. There are some polish issues for sure but those are things that weren't really acceptable on release either, imo.