Sonic Lost World @ Gamescom

[SuperLink]

Yes there's a Mario influence, I wasn't denying that, but it's not the single persistent element of the whole game's design philosophy and these designs aren't inherently Mario things just because Mario used them once when tons of other games in history have used them too.

 

Sonic Lost World is a product of platforming history, not a product of Mario.

 

EDIT: Also what Wraith said, Mario's visuals can still be detailed too.

Edited August 26, 2013 by SuperLink

[Lady Soniko]

Love you too. ♥

 

Yeah...No, stop that shit, he wasn't calling you annoying, just this discussion since this is what, our 4th-5th run through again? Shit's going in circles.

[Kuzu]

I can smell another slope physics argument coming.

[SuperLink]

I guess long argument short SLW doesn't resemble Mario any more than Saints Row resembles GTA. They're both their own thing, despite obvious and understandable inspirations. However, they're different enough that you may enjoy one even if you don't enjoy the other (not a huge GTA fan, but I think Saints Row is frickin' awesome).

 

I also am curious to know that, if Nintendo has an inherent design philosophy (i.e. people can make a game that "looks like a Nintendo game" what would a game "that looks like a Sony game" look like? Or a game that "looks like a Microsoft game", "looks like an EA game", "looks like a SEGA game", and so forth?

 

I don't think companies have looks, Nintendo just make considerably more cartoony games than most devs. If all devs made cartoony games semi-regularly (they don't), people wouldn't say "it looks like a Nintendo game", I guarantee you that.

 

And that bloody depresses me.

 

(you're still allowed to dislike it btw, I'm not against people disliking it, I'm against people disliking it "because it looks like Nintendo". It doesn't look like Nintendo, it looks cartoony, Nintendo often* looks cartoony, not "like Nintendo". They just regularly do something not many other devs do, but that doesn't mean they own it.)

 

*ty wraith

Edited August 26, 2013 by SuperLink

[Kuzu]

You know its funny you should say that; Saint's Row started off as a blatant GTA clone, and now look at it. If LW actually had more than two games to actually expand, there's no telling what could happen that will separate it from Mario.

[Wraith]

Nintendo doesn't even rely on the "cartoony" look half the damn time, which is what pisses me off the most about this. You're generalizing and underestimating what Mario and, to a lesser extent, Nintendo have done, can do and will do just so you have an argument against Lost World not looking the way you want it to.

[SuperLink]

You know its funny you should say that; Saint's Row started off as a blatant GTA clone, and now look at it. If LW actually had more than two games to actually expand, there's no telling what could happen that will separate it from Mario.

Which is why it's a super high school level shame that people are willing to dismiss any future evolutions right off the bat just because of this first step.

[Scar]

Man if they ditch what they learn from SLoW in favor of more shitty boost gameplay, that'd be it for me. I have no tolerance for the series diving back into that shithole.

I don't think there are many asking specifically for that.

I just think there are better ways of doing what Lost Worlds is trying to do. Maybe I don't know exactly how, but I can see some limitations. Certain things concern me.

It's not shitty narrow hallways and there's tons of paths and tons of places to transfer between them.

OK, its not shitty narrow hallways. So what? By your standards, that's not really accomplishing much anyway.

Windy Hill, doesn't look that amazing to me. I've not seen much of Desert Ruins, but it looks pretty boring so far. Silent Jungle looks decent, and looks like it could have a lot of shit to do in it, but I've not seen much of it. However, in most of the runs I've seen, it seems like you're mainly going forward. There are rain sections, which for all intents and purposes may as well been lifted straight out of Generations or Unleashed or whathaveyou.

I don't know. I'm not convinced yet. Maybe as more details come out, I'll be won over. In the event of which, I still won't want the franchise to use tubes floating in the air, as a game-design standard for the forseeable future.

Right now, I remain skeptical.

[Sami]

I guess long argument short SLW doesn't resemble Mario any more than Saints Row resembles GTA. They're both their own thing, despite obvious and understandable inspirations. However, they're different enough that you may enjoy one even if you don't enjoy the other.

 

I also am curious to know that, if Nintendo has an inherent design philosophy (i.e. people can make a game that "looks like a Nintendo game" what would a game "that looks like a Sony game" look like? Or a game that "looks like a Microsoft game", "looks like an EA game", "looks like a SEGA game", and so forth?

 

I don't think companies have looks, Nintendo just make considerably more cartoony games than most devs. If all devs made cartoony games semi-regularly (they don't), people wouldn't say "it looks like a Nintendo game", I guarantee you that.

 

And that bloody depresses me.

 

(you're still allowed to dislike it btw)

 

Allow me to rephrase, then, because I think you're misunderstanding my main point - I don't dislike it purely on the basis that it looks like Mario, I dislike it because I dislike it. It's a style I'm not fond of, it's the exact opposite of my preference in game design, and I, put simply, do not like it.

 

Coincidentally, I don't like how Mario does this either, so the easiest way to state my point is to say that it looks like Mario, I don't like the look or design of Mario, and therefore I do not like the look or design of this game.

 

I really don't understand why this is such a huge point of debate - there's nothing inherently wrong with it looking like Mario, or as you say a cartoony platformer from the 90's (that isn't Sonic), the problem lies with the fact that I don't like Mario, or cartoony platformers from the 90's. That cool?

 

But fine, let's say it doesn't look like Mario. Fine. It doesn't resemble Mario at all. In that case - 

 

Man! I really don't like that "tube in the sky" design! I really don't like the simplified colors and textures. I really don't like how bright and high contrast all of the colors are. I really don't like the complete lack of detail. I really don't like how every level feels less like an environment and more like a collection of blocks put together for the express purpose of being a level. I really don't like the direction they took with this game that doesn't resemble any other game whatsoever yet still disappoints me greatly and is not at all what I want from a Sonic game.

 

k?

Edited August 26, 2013 by Discoid

[SuperLink]

I personally don't think the floating tubes thing is the most amazing thing either even if on just an aesthetic level (I mean in gameplay it might be hella fun I'll see), but I'm not really that bugged because I can't see them using it for every future game anyway.

 

I've been a Sonic fan long enough to know that I can't have expectations.. ever. No point in starting now.

 

I'm personally thinking the next 3D Sonic will use different kinds of landscapes regardless of what people think of the tubes. It feels like a one time gimmick to me, whereas the speed-changing and parkour systems are here to stay and expand.

 

EDIT @ Discoid: 'k, in that case I get you. I was peeved because you seemed to act like you only disliked it because it looked like Mario, when I didn't think it was fair to base an entire game off something it wasn't in the same way it wouldn't be fair to base a dislike of Saints Row on a dislike of GTA. So I misunderstood.

 

But I got to say a lot of things I'd been wanting to say at this thread/the Mario comparisons anyway, so I don't feel like I wasted my time.

Edited August 26, 2013 by SuperLink

[RisingForever]

It's not shitty narrow hallways and there's tons of paths and tons of places to transfer between them.

 

I don't really see what you mean by all these open paths. The one really open acts we've seen is the first act of Windy Hill and the Silent Forest act, both of which were tube stages. The 2D dessert level wasn't very open. The honeycomb level sure as hell wasn't open. The casino act just had those bonus pinball areas if you collected enough chips. The snowball level was just as linear as the honeycomb level. The second act of Windy Hill didn't look that open either. The only acts that seem open in the game are outside of the tube stages. There's nothing wrong with being linear if you do it right but don't say this game is more open than the boost trilogy.

[Blitz 'n Burst]

iizuka has already said the parkour won't be returning any time soon tho

at the very least it won't be in the next game

[Sami]

I personally don't think the floating tubes thing is the most amazing thing either even if on just an aesthetic level (I mean in gameplay it might be hella fun I'll see), but I'm not really that bugged because I can't see them using it for every future game anyway.

 

I've been a Sonic fan long enough to know that I can't have expectations.. ever. No point in starting now.

 

I'm personally thinking the next 3D Sonic will use different kinds of landscapes regardless of what people think of the tubes. It feels like a one time gimmick to me, whereas the speed-changing and parkour systems are here to stay and expand.

 

EDIT @ Discoid: 'k, in that case I get you. I was peeved because you seemed to act like you only disliked it because it looked like Mario, when I didn't think it was fair to base an entire game off something it wasn't in the same way it wouldn't be fair to base a dislike of Saints Row on a dislike of GTA. So I misunderstood.

 

But I got to say a lot of things I'd been wanting to say at this thread/the Mario comparisons anyway, so I don't feel like I wasted my time.

 

To be fair, you have to consider that the Mario comparisons wouldn't be quite so pervasive and common if there wasn't at least some semblance of truth to them. :V

[Rinzler]

We're trusting Izuka of all people now?

 

I read that as more like "We haven't thought about the game after this one."

[Soniman]

iizuka has already said the parkour won't be returning any time soon tho

at the very least it won't be in the next game

 

I don't think that was his exact words, I think he's waiting to see if the formula is successful first before using it in more games.

[Diogenes]

The one really open acts we've seen is the first act of Windy Hill and the Silent Forest act, both of which were tube stages.

The tube stages are what I was talking about.

but don't say this game is more open than the boost trilogy.

It is more open by fucking lightyears. Having some linear stages doesn't change that.

[Wraith]

I think Iizuka was trying to word it in a way where you guys don't lose your shit if the Parkour ends up sucking.

[Kuzu]

To be fair, you have to consider that the Mario comparisons wouldn't be quite so pervasive and common if there wasn't at least some semblance of truth to them. :V

 

I don't think anyone is going to argue the Mario comparisons, so much as how their inclusion has an impact on how the game will play or its level design which most people who have made the comparison seem to treat it as a terrible, horrible thing.

Edited August 26, 2013 by Azure Yakuzu

[Blitz 'n Burst]

Captain Levi, on 26 Aug 2013 - 01:47, said:We're trusting Izuka of all people now?
I read that as more like "We haven't thought about the game after this one."
they haven't thought about a game that's very probably already in development? i know the guy tends to spout a load of bullshit, but i think he knows what's going on in his own games

oops i fucked the quote lol

[SuperLink]

To be fair, you have to consider that the Mario comparisons wouldn't be quite so pervasive and common if there wasn't at least some semblance of truth to them. :V

SLW takes reasonable inspirations from an influential game franchise within the same genre just as most game franchises do. The Mario comparisons are understandable, of course there is some truth to them, but they're not so pervasive that the whole game is only this way now because of Mario. Every good game that draws inspiration from another good game is still very much its own thing.

 

Okami was inspired by Zelda, but it managed to go above and beyond that in its own ways.

 

They noticed some things, thought, "hey, we can work with this", and so they did. I'm pretty sure they're not walking through the programming offices saying "um, excuse me lol, that doesn't look nearly mario enough, fucker, ur fired". Sonic Lost World is its own thing, that's what I want people to respect. I think even if it was partially inspired by things you don't personally like, I hope the gameplay can be of some merit to you because like I said I enjoy Saints Row despite its similarities to GTA.

 

(also games like Saints Row and Metal Gear are proof that I can still enjoy "realistic" games if the gameplay is fun or ridiculous enough for me, even if both games have a lot of "cartoony" elements. So I hope in the same sense that the cartoony style of SLW doesn't ruin the gameplay for you)

Edited August 26, 2013 by SuperLink

[Rinzler]

Given that Sonic Team very rarely think ahead I wouldn't be surprised.

[RisingForever]

The tube stages are what I was talking about.

 

We don't how much of the game is tube stages, so I think we shouldn't base the openness of the game on one type of stage.

 

It is more open by fucking lightyears. Having some linear stages doesn't change that.

 

Compare this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=fZ5OSu76rk8#t=1031

 

to this:

 

They are both just as linear with optional paths that really don't make a difference.

[SilentDoom]

We don't how much of the game is tube stages, so I think we shouldn't base the openness of the game on one type of stage.

 

Compare this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=fZ5OSu76rk8#t=1031

 

to this:

 

They are both just as linear with optional paths that really don't make a difference.

 

I don't even know how you can take those two and say they are just as linear as each other.  In Unleashed literally all there is to do is run in a straight line.  The optional paths in Unleashed don't make a difference because the game pretty much solely encourages speed and reactions.  The only goal is to tackle the level quickly, and there's pretty much only one optimal way to do that.  If you go via any other way (which there are painfully few), it's usually by mistake due to you not reacting to something quickly.

 

Lost World's alternate possible routes on the other hand do make a difference, and contribute to how you can tackle the level generally.  There isn't the single optimal way to tackle the level because there's more to do in them than run in a line.  That first section of Windy Hill has is more open than the entirety of Windmill Isle for example.  Additionally, the mechanics of Lost World by themselves naturally allow for greater freedom of movement, allowing the player to essentially create their own route simply because they have the freedom to do so.  

[Diogenes]

We don't how much of the game is tube stages, so I think we shouldn't base the openness of the game on one type of stage.

I was responding specifically to someone talking about the tube stages. What I said applies specifically to the tube stages. It was not meant to apply to anything but the tube stages. Because the tube stages are exactly and only what I was talking about.

Compare this:

*snip*

 

to this:

*snip*

Compare Windy Hill Act 1 to literally any level in Unleashed, Colors, or Generations.

[WhoWhatMan]

Colors barely have any different paths, and when it does, It pretty much better to take the normal path.

Edited August 26, 2013 by KaBlamJamDan