Sonic Runn..er wait... "SSMB YOU CREATED A TIME PARADOX!"

[Wraith]

Lost World came out half a decade later, and was exclusively optimized for more powerful hardware.

It shouldn't be arguable, it should be very clearly better. There's really no excuse, and it'll only become more immediately evident how piss poor of a developer they are if they still haven't managed to clearly top a game they made in 2008.

When the competition is a horribly optimized 2008 multiplat, it shouldn't be arguable.

 

 

When we're comparing two completely different Artstyles, it's always going to be "arguable" no matter how much time passes. It's not going to seem very clearly better because it's so different. That's not pathetic. That's just how opinions work. If we had an Unleashed style game on the Wii U it'd be a different story. 

[SuperLink]

Different artstyle. SLW isn't inherently inferior to Unleashed, it's intentionally simplified, different. It has more dynamic ground, including grass that isn't just a picture on the ground, it also has tons of things moving on screen at once whether it be badnik hordes, obstacles and whatnot, you can often see reaaally far away in SLW. Unleashed is the king in terms of textures no doubt, but in terms of actual modelling or how many different artefacts are on screen moving at once, SLW may be superior, which is why it's arguable.

 

Unleashed looks better to many people because there is nuts detail in the textures and backgrounds, but none of that is interactable on the same level as much of SLW's areas are.

 

Again that's why it's arguable, this debate simply isn't ever going to reach a conclusion because SLW isn't consciously worse than Unleashed, it's consciously different, simplified for style. You can still put a helluva lot of effort into simplicity, even if it's not your cup of tea, the lack of detailed textures doesn't necessarily mean the tech within the game is inherently inferior.

 

And I guess I'm done with that point because this argument cannot be conclusive towards either side.

[Hero of Legend]

Honestly I didn't give much of a hoot about the interactibility of Lost World's areas, they were pretty boring and at a lot of times rather confusing.

[SuperLink]

Honestly I didn't give much of a hoot about the interactibility of Lost World's areas, they were pretty boring and at a lot of times rather confusing.

They were, but that wasn't what I was trying to argue at all.

[azoo]

Man I hope for the next game to at least have lighting and environments as nice as Unleashed again. Given that the game most likely won't be as fast as a boost game it may not even be a big stretch to expect that on Wii U with a smooth framerate.

[Willsy]

Why are we comparing the Wii U to the less powerful 360/PS3?

Because it's only slightly more powerful than those two consoles. It has a slower processor than the 360 and PS3 though.

[Scar]

Different artstyle. SLW isn't inherently inferior to Unleashed, it's intentionally simplified, different. It has more dynamic ground, including grass that isn't just a picture on the ground, it also has tons of things moving on screen at once whether it be badnik hordes, obstacles and whatnot, you can often see reaaally far away in SLW. Unleashed is the king in terms of textures no doubt, but in terms of actual modelling or how many different artefacts are on screen moving at once, SLW may be superior, which is why it's arguable.

Most of Lost World is a skybox. As in a stage that is floating over backgrounds. Its basically Heroes, except you can't fall off the stage, cause everything is folded around itself into tubes.

Yes its an intentionally simplified, stylised art direction, but you can't seriously argue to me, that there is more stuff on screen, cause there just isn't.

 

Unleashed looks better to many people because there is nuts detail in the textures and backgrounds, but none of that is interactable on the same level as much of SLW's areas are.

And now, we have the capabilities to make games that look like Unleashed, and be able to interact with a greater proportion of the stage. We could argue art styles all day, but to me, the biggest visual problem with LW, is the fact that stages are literally floating above a background.

Which is why Sky Road, pisses me off. Why is it a "Sky Road", when Windy Hill isn't? Both are tubes that are floating around above a background. The only difference is Sky Road has clouds on the background....

Really stupid.

It doesn't matter to me, whether or not you can interact with 100% of the level geometry. Sonic isn't an open-world franchise. You can have stuff that looks pretty, but stays in the background.

 

Again that's why it's arguable, this debate simply isn't ever going to reach a conclusion because SLW isn't consciously worse than Unleashed, it's consciously different, simplified for style. You can still put a helluva lot of effort into simplicity, even if it's not your cup of tea, the lack of detailed textures doesn't necessarily mean the tech within the game is inherently inferior.

In spite of the visual simplifications, it confuses me, that the lighting is worse than in Unleashed. Its not like you're taxing the GPU with fuckloads of geometry in the background. They probably could have gone for slightly better lighting....

 

And I guess I'm done with that point because this argument cannot be conclusive towards either side.

You're certainly right about that!

 

I refer to the fact that it's been said by some that the Wii U wouldn't be able to handle an 8th gen standard Sonic game at 60 fps without being heavily nerfed. Such has yet to be proven with actual results though.

This depends on what an 8th Gen Sonic game aside from Lost World looks like. Cause there is plenty of evidence to suggest that the Wii U wouldn't have a hope in hell in producing games that look like KZ:SF or Ryse, with similar levels of performance.

If SEGA were to use the PS4 or XB1 as the lead platform for development of a game, then the Wii U would be guaranteed to require some nerfing, unless they intentionally limit the visual fidelity on the more powerful systems.

[Autosaver]

It doesn't matter to me, whether or not you can interact with 100% of the level geometry. Sonic isn't an open-world franchise.

 

This has nothing to do with not being an open-world franchise. From Sonic 3 & Knuckles to Sonic Adventure, the levels have always been intractable. The issue with the level being linear with everything cool in the background is that it throws off the immersion.

 

Sonic Lost World was a budget, low staff game. I think it looks great and the fact it runs in HD at 60fps is pretty cool. It's the first Sonic game in a long that that hasn't run like shit.

[Sami]

This has nothing to do with not being an open-world franchise. From Sonic 3 & Knuckles to Sonic Adventure, the levels have always been intractable. The issue with the level being linear with everything cool in the background is that it throws off the immersion.

 

Sonic Lost World was a budget, low staff game. I think it looks great and the fact it runs in HD at 60fps is pretty cool. It's the first Sonic game in a long that that hasn't run like shit.

 

Generations was pretty stable, what are you talking about? Unleashed was kind of a mess, yeah, but despite being a bit underwhelming in comparison I don't recall being annoyed with Generations' stability.

 

And I'd argue that having basic level geometry floating in the sky for no reason at all beyond "oh but its a game" is a hundred times more jarring than a clear cut path in a believable setting. The difference isn't that one gives you some unprecedented amount of control while the other doesn't - it's just that Lost World has nothing beyond what is available to the player, which isn't a spectacular amount of content to begin with.

[PSI Wind]

What's wrong with the Wii U version being equal in frame-rate? As I've said before, the best case scenario would be that all versions only have graphical differences. The idea of Third-party Wii U standards being 720p/30 FPS is so terribly biased. We're in the 8th Console gen for fucks sakes. Maybe it can be the standard for a few years, but once third-parties actually optimize their games well for each system, each one should at least get every game released at 60 FPS. And SEGA already developed 2 games for the Wii U running at 60 FPS, so they know how to do it. If you want to be wowed by this gen, 60 FPS is the way to go, not just some added bells and whistles like being able to see Sonic's fur or reflection in the rings. Gameplay is important, and FRAMERATE is what helps gameplay, not cheap parlor tricks.

[Red Hot Jack]

Hogfather, when/if SEGA confirms the reboot is happening, can we rename this thread to "Sega say Sonic Boom, we say the doom!" ?

[Scar]

This has nothing to do with not being an open-world franchise. From Sonic 3 & Knuckles to Sonic Adventure, the levels have always been intractable.

S3K is a 2D Sidescroller, so you mentioning it at all is rather baffling. Adventure probably didn't have fancier background geometry because the Dreamcast was incapable of doing something like that convincingly.

The issue with the level being linear with everything cool in the background is that it throws off the immersion.

What, and having a chunk of level arbitrarily floating over a background, is somehow more immersive?

So the best solution for resolving the issue of it being far to impractical to have Sonic interact with 100% of all background geometry, is to just get rid of it entirely?

I'm sorry, but I don't want newer Sonic games more closely resembling a higher-fidelity Heroes.

Like I've said so many times before; I'm OK with Lost Worlds art style (though I still prefer Unleashed's approach), but I absolutely cannot stand the "highway in the sky" approach.

Sonic Lost World was a budget, low staff game. I think it looks great and the fact it runs in HD at 60fps is pretty cool. It's the first Sonic game in a long that that hasn't run like shit.

If running at a solid 30fps is suddenly "Running like shit", then I really don't know what to say.

[Badnik Mechanic]

Hogfather, when/if SEGA confirms the reboot is happening, can we rename this thread to "Sega say Sonic Boom, we say the doom!" ?

 

The hell? 

 

There is no reboot.

[Red Hot Jack]

The hell? 

 

There is no reboot.

 

Of course not. That post was before the announcement, when people thought the reboot was happening, that's why I said "if".

[Tani Coyote]

My thoughts on 2015, now that I've thought about it.

SEGA usually gives weight to anniversary titles, so we can presume 2016 will be an ambitious game. 25 is a significant number as well, so there's that.

Now, if 2016 is a big game, it stands to reason you might want a lower-intensity project for 2015.

I think 2015 will be a new Sonic All Stars Racing installment. This game looks to be massively multiplatform as Transformed was, and releasing next year rather than this year ensures there's no competition with Mario Kart, similar to how Transformed was released in an off-year for Mario Kart.

More reason for an All Stars? Let's be frank here. They can't keep doing Transformed DLC forever. All Stars Racing is easily a cash cow waiting to happen, and so it stands to reason they'd get a new installment going sooner or later.

Going for 3-year intervals rather than 2 will also probably keep that series fresher.

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

I wonder, if Sonic Team and Big Red Button are going to be alternating with their installments, maybe Sonic Boom 2 will also be out in 2016.

[Tani Coyote]

If the cartoon and game make a huge difference in profits, I think that's practically guaranteed. Regardless of whether or not it replaces the main series.

SEGA's also released more than one game in years before, so who knows, if they're outsourcing, it's possible we could get a main Sonic title AND a second Boom title in a single year.

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

If the cartoon and game make a huge difference in profits, I think that's practically guaranteed. Regardless of whether or not it replaces the main series.

SEGA's also released more than one game in years before, so who knows, if they're outsourcing, it's possible we could get a main Sonic title AND a second Boom title in a single year.

The more un-rushed and thought-out Sonic titles the merrier!

[Dreadknux]

I'm confused and I'm pretty sure it's been cleared up in past pages so forgive me for asking;

2015 isn't Sonic Boom, is it? Boom is coming out 2014. So this is a thing yet to be announced?

[Sami]

I'm confused and I'm pretty sure it's been cleared up in past pages so forgive me for asking;

2015 isn't Sonic Boom, is it? Boom is coming out 2014. So this is a thing yet to be announced?

Yes. Boom is the final Nintendo exclusive, so it fits with the 2015 game being listed as a multiplat.

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

 

This depends on what an 8th Gen Sonic game aside from Lost World looks like. Cause there is plenty of evidence to suggest that the Wii U wouldn't have a hope in hell in producing games that look like KZ:SF or Ryse, with similar levels of performance.

 

Well Sonic Boom, CryEngine and all looks damn fine. Now we're just hoping for 60 fps to go with it!

[TheOcelot]

I'm confused and I'm pretty sure it's been cleared up in past pages so forgive me for asking;

2015 isn't Sonic Boom, is it? Boom is coming out 2014. So this is a thing yet to be announced?

 

Yeah, Boom is the third exclusive Nintendo game coming in 2014.

 

Whereas Sonic 2015 is a multi-platform game.

[Doctor MK]

I'm confused and I'm pretty sure it's been cleared up in past pages so forgive me for asking;

2015 isn't Sonic Boom, is it? Boom is coming out 2014. So this is a thing yet to be announced?

 

Yeah, as far as I'm aware Boom is 2014, and then whatever this game turns out to be will be released in 2015 on Wii U/Xbox One/PS4 rather than being Nintendo exclusive. So there's still at least one unannounced Sonic title on the way.

[Lady Soniko]

Yes. Boom is the final Nintendo exclusive, so it fits with the 2015 game being listed as a multiplat.

 

Wait... Final? Wasn't it revealed to only be the Second Exclusive?

[Sami]

Well Sonic Boom, CryEngine and all looks damn fine. Now we're just hoping for 60 fps to go with it!

CryEngine 3 is very old, and also compatible with PS3/360. It won't run at 60fps either. Too intensive.