*(Critique I Feel Suits The Current Sonic Franchise)*

[Chaos Incarnate]

Yeah a lot of those quotes just boil down to "be good".

Which is really just kind of obvious and meaningless, if it's left at that. Everyone thinks Sonic should "be good". Problem is no one can agree on what actually constitutes Sonic "being good". The things I value in the series may not be what the next guy values, and likewise him to the guy after him.

I'll admit I'm fully guilty of this, stating my expectations to be "just be a good game"  most of the time.

Full disclosure, I couldn't really give two fucks as to what qualifies as good to a Sonic fan anymore. Everyone wants something different from this series, whether it be boost sonic, classic sonic, adventure sonic, or anywhere in-between. No matter what kind of Sonic game comes along, there's ALWAYS guaranteed to be a large group that is unhappy with the direction of the game, no matter how many think it is a good game. If it's enjoyable to me, I'll call it a good game, other opinions be damned. 

Edited November 30, 2015 by Chaos Incarnate

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

That's why one of the key things as far as making a "Good Sonic Game" is to not play favorites with a specific group.

Put things you know people will like in the franchise, but if one group is going to have a trivial bitchfit over something they don't like for whatever arbitrary reason then they should be ignored - if the game is good and works with Sonic, but Classic fans dislike the game for not looking or playing like the Classics, they can fuck off; Shadow haters (or haters of any other character for that matter) dislike having the character around (playable or not), they can fuck off; fans dislike not having their favorite character around, they can fuck off; if there's a much bigger, even darker story along the likes of SatAM that's actually done right and well received, but those who don't like the idea of stories at all (much less dark ones) in the Sonic franchise, they can fuck off. And so on.

That's not saying that they can do anything and call it a "Good Sonic Game" like there aren't boundaries in the franchise to be aware of, and it's definitely not saying they should ignore criticism (especially constructive criticism, which everyone should give and value) when there are faults in the work that need to be addressed and improved. But the point is to not cave into the insular greed we constantly see among fans who want things their way at the expense of others - for all our differences, we all love to play and be active in the Sonic franchise. But the last thing we need is disabling and destructive criticism that's so common place, because it doesn't really help things.

Just like it's failure to try and please everyone, it's failure to please one dedicated group over another who loves the franchise equally as much because no dedicated group deserves more than the other - and the one group you're catering towards might still find something to complain and trash the game (whether they have a point is not something I'm going to go into, but you get what I'm saying). At the end of the day, people who shell out their cash for Sonic want to play a Sonic game worth playing. But the more rigid your values are without exception about the stuff you think should or shouldn't be in over someone who likes those things, the more you're likely to miss out and be bitter.

Edited December 1, 2015 by ChaosSupremeSonic

[Chris Knopps]

Personally it would be best in my opinion to make one specific target for each game.

One for the kids from time to time ala Colors/Lost World, one for 1998-2008 timeline fans ala Sonic Adventure and Sonic Unleashed, and one for the Genesis timeline fans ala -coughs3&Kcough- because come on, best game of the bunch.

The problem since Colors-Now is that the primary, and lets face it, only target is children, and a VERY narrow part of children at that.

[FriendBot]

 

The problem since Colors-Now is that the primary, and lets face it, only target is children, and a VERY narrow part of children at that.

But wasn't Sonic always aimed at for children? I mean they only difference between now and then is that now, it's sillier or atleast as silly as it can be without being too insulting to the mind (though Colors and Gens might be touching that barrier a bit too close for comfort).

[Wraith]

 

The problem since Colors-Now is that the primary, and lets face it, only target is children, and a VERY narrow part of children at that.

Sonic has always been aimed at children. You just got older is all.

 

I mean yeah the tone of the series changed, but it was more like changing from a children's action cartoon to a children's comedy cartoon, than any significant change in audience. 

[Monkey Destruction Switch]

Not only are all the Sonic games basically meant for kids, but in my personal opinion, the Adventures-type games are perhaps the most easily "outgrowable" storyline wise, because when you're young they feel really epic and awesome and mature, but as you grow older they seem much less stellar. I remember first revisiting Sonic Adventure after years of not playing it, and being floored to the point of near hilarity by how non-impressive it was compared to how I thought of it when I was younger. I still like it for what it is, but it's just impossible for me to think about it the same way I did as a kid. At least the comedic stuff isn't pretending to be something you can take seriously in any capacity. (Which isn't to say I like it better or don't like it better, I haven't watched the cutscenes for Colors in years and haven't ever watched the cutscenes from the other "comedic" games, so I don't think I can really say.)

And I agree with Wraith that the more comedic style isn't necessarily that much more kid-oriented than the adventuresome style. It's just a different kind of appealing to kids. I think the change was more motivated by not wanting to make another embarrassing mistake like Shadow the Hedgehog and Sonic '06 than by changing target audiences.

In my opinion, a better idea than making some "adventurey" games and some "comedy" games is making stories which combine some comedy and a reasonable of light-heartedness with action, adventure and some genuine tension. You know - balance. Don't take things too seriously, don't treat everything like a joke, and perhaps more importantly, be well-written. It's very likely that both styles would be appreciated by more people if the writing was just really decent. It shouldn't really be that impossible, but I still don't really have any confidence that Sega will be able to make it happen... =P

[Wraith]

It's also worth noting that the most popular cartoons right now are all comedies and all the action stuff has gotten the shaft as of late. Kids have shifted their attention toward comedy stuff now. I figure that might have inspired Sonic's shift more than anything. 

[Chris Knopps]

Well, going by the 1998-2008 portion of the franchise Sonic was primarily a "teen-tween" franchise, where it was around the age of 11/12-16/17 that was the primary focus. Before that, in the Genesis days it feels as though the prime audience was somewhere around 9-15.

It was only Colors-Onward where the franchise focused around the 5-10 range, and I can't really say it has done anything for the franchise either. Personally the best target audience feels like 9-16 for the Sonic franchise, at least for the sake of it having more... Meat I suppose.

[Nepenthe]

Sonic was always aimed at children. However, this was not always done at the exclusion of older audiences.

The classic games are not nearly as dumbed down in terms of context, storytelling, and even gameplay and y'all know it.

[Wraith]

Sonic was always aimed at children. However, this was not always done at the exclusion of older audiences.

The classic games are not nearly as dumbed down in terms of context, storytelling, and even gameplay and y'all know it.

I haven't actually been able to take a Sonic plot all that seriously since I was 14. It doesn't matter what "era" it's from. The series has always been aimed at kids to me and everything pretty much started going over my head at the same time. It being "dumbed down" in those departments doesn't have much to do with whether or not they were going for kids either. The Zelda series expands and downsizes in those departments all the time, and I wouldn't say A Link Between Worlds is any more "for kids" than Skyward Sword is.  These games aren't really "excluding older audiences" any more than they were since they first started going 3D. 

 

[Chris Knopps]

Sonic was always aimed at children. However, this was not always done at the exclusion of older audiences.

The classic games are not nearly as dumbed down in terms of context, storytelling, and even gameplay and y'all know it.

This is basically how I feel. While the franchise has always had set demographics it always felt inclusive towards those who weren't the primary target. Nowadays it seems to have its set target and does its best EXCLUSIVELY for that target. It's... Difficult for anyone not targeted to get into Sonic because of this, likely the primary reason behind much of the issues within the consumer market.

Especially with the overbearing comedy focus nowadays, there isn't anything offered to people who don't really care about comedy and are often turned off by it, which has also caused... Issues with consumers both old and new. It's okay to be funny, noooot so much when that's what Sonic becomes all about.

Edited December 3, 2015 by Chris Knopps

[Nepenthe]

I haven't actually been able to take a Sonic plot all that seriously since I was 14. It doesn't matter what "era" it's from. The series has always been aimed at kids to me and everything pretty much started going over my head at the same time. It being "dumbed down" in those departments doesn't have much to do with whether or not they were going for kids either. The Zelda series expands and downsizes in those departments all the time, and I wouldn't say A Link Between Worlds is any more "for kids" than Skyward Sword is.  These games aren't really "excluding older audiences" any more than they were since they first started going 3D. 

 

It's not a matter of taking things super seriously. It's a matter of tone, subject matter, and thematics, of which there are marked differences between the eras of games. Children's entertainment varies in the focus on these things and others, and its this variance as to whether or not certain works crosses the line into what I just consider family entertainment. Finding Nemo is a children's cartoon, but that distinction doesn't mean it's as equivalent to Dora the Explorer in terms of what it's trying to accomplish.

[Monkey Destruction Switch]

Ya know, I'm not too knowledgeable about video games, but I have a feeling that teenagers' and adults' enjoyment of kids' games probably has a lot more to do with solid gameplay than storyline. I mean, Mario is way more obviously kiddy than Sonic and yet it's much more highly esteemed.

Honestly, I think the classic games' storylines are the least objectionable to older players primarily because the gameplay is solid...and maybe the fact that there's not much story helps a bit too

It's hard for me to imagine that the 1998 - 2008 portion of the series was for teens and tweens when I'm only barely an adult and the stories are so hard for me to take seriously. It seems a lot more like...for tweens and younger.

[Chris Knopps]

My issue is that presently, even though the Sonic franchise strongly targets children around 5-10 it only targets a select portion of children, it's not just a select portion of other consumers. It feels as though the company thinks all children are a hive mind when, being honest, children are probably far more diverse than older people are and are thus an even harder target to hit.

And being honest, I'd like a Sonic conversation where Mario isn't brought up thanks much...

That issue aside, when you get right down to it the Genesis titles had the same amount of story any of the other games did, in fact the Genesis titles have far more, FAR MORE lore in them than most present games especially. You could spend hours/days going into the Genesis series canon whereas for most things from Unleashed onward, well... Dunno... Each game is basically in its own world/reality so there's not much to dig into.

[Komodin]

The 1998-2008 era of the Sonic franchise history may not necessarily be executed all that more maturely and nuanced than the other parts, but it was more inclusive of a periphery demographic to develop. To that end, i wouldn't mind a return to form on that front.

[Chris Knopps]

The 1998-2008 era of the Sonic franchise history may not necessarily be executed all that more maturely and nuanced than the other parts, but it was more inclusive of a periphery demographic to develop. To that end, i wouldn't mind a return to form on that front.

 

Personally it was from 1991-2008 altogether that was easier to feel included no matter what the age target was at any point. It was only when Colors-Now came around that it became more and more difficult, then with the BOOM franchise the PR outright said it wasn't for fans period.

Which... Still confuses me. The franchise went from being difficult to find oneself included to being not included whatsoever. There are many, MANY things that have caused situations to become as they have revolving consumers/fans, and the trouble finding personal enjoyment out of having a different taste has become seemingly impossible because the franchise is... Altogether a single flavor so to say now.

Love color and comedy? Welcome! Into anything else? Get lost.

Edited December 3, 2015 by Chris Knopps

[FriendBot]

I'm with ol' MDS with that the best way to make a Sonic story, is going for the proper mixture action/adventure and comedy. Sonic is just as much as a cartoon character as he is an action character, he can appeal to both without changing too much.

Which is why I feel why I like the Storybook series and Unleashed's stories much more than the Adventures actually. I guess my issue with the Adventures' stories is that they're well-crafted stories, they do provide a lot of lore and does a nice atmosphere but I can't say it's all perfect either. 

I've kind of grown more mixed to Adventure 2's story but not too much to the point I hate it but I can't really say that it's the best Sonic story ever made. I still like it but yeah, if future Sonic stories are made in that aspect, I might grow to loathe it a lot more heck probably as much as I would with stories like Colors or Gens. (oh boy, being ballsy eh?)

There's just this nice charm to the stories told in the Storybook series and Unleashed. Guess it helps that those games had the best portrayals of the blue blur himself, cocky but full of heart. So I'm more lenient to those stories despite their flaws since I feel more invested in that "era", I guess.

So yeah, I prefer my main series Sonic stories from 07-09 plz. I prefer Adventure 2 to be one and done deal for me though it would be nice if some of the lore presented in those games came up in future titles.

eh, what would i know. I'm just a guy that enjoys LW3DS for some reason.

[Nepenthe]

One thing I like to say is that the older 3D games seemed to be about something or explore a theme beyond the main plot of stopping Eggman. The Adventure series is about things like revenge, empathy, forgiveness, misanthropy versus philanthropy, etc.. Heroes is about teamwork (even though the team fights ruin it). ShtH is about personal choice and responsibility, Sonic 06 is about strong emotional bonds. Even Unleashed is about shit like friendship, kindness, understanding yourself and whatnot. It's the extra themes that at least gives one some subtext to talk about and examine to some degree, which makes them a little more universal versus strictly brain-dead entertainment for six hours. Lost World is the exception, but like Heroes it kinda just fucks it up.

[PandoloFox]

Sonic adventure 2 in terms of story on its own is not the best story told in sonic. Its way too focused on the action parts to properly cover everything people might be looking for in a greatly told story. but this is also why i love sonic adventure 2 a lot. It keeps the story fast paced, simple enough to follow as a whole, leaves out enough details for specualtions and makes you want more. It never feels like its in the way of the concept of sonic. sonic adventure 1 has a slower paced story telling going on which is a lot better when going into character emotions and small details that makes the world more real. But since it is so slow paced and detailed it doesnt leave much speculation, not much more to be desired and its slow pace will kill it for some. So its all about what you prefer here realy. 

heroes and lost world feelos so disconnected from  whats actualy happening in the game that i dont find much to care about it, that elements also completely ruins stuff in them isnt that nice either.

As for sonics targeted audience, ofcourse children were targeted. but it was done in a different way. Before you targeted the teenagers when it came to advertisement and such which would make them think it was cool and what the older kids thought was cool was going to get attention from the smaller ones that wants to feel included. No inapropriate stuff was put into sonic, but a lot of focus was put into the style of the game. I hate to bring in the past a lot, but segas marketed themselves as doing what nintendo didnt. Nintendo at the time marketed their stuff for children, thats what rob the toy was for and such. So sega marketed their stuff by being the "cooler" kid on the block. Not just safe family oriented stuff, but being on the edge, doing stuff that was daring. So yes, trageted for children, but not the kind of children they are marketing their games for today.

[Chris Knopps]

Nowadays it's more like "We do what Ninten-Does!" especially after Lost World.

This goes hand in hand with my argument about having a target audience in the past but at the same time clearly being open to targeting others, albeit unintentionally perhaps but still an inclusive experience for those who weren't the focus.

I really can't say the whole SonicxMario bro-ship has done anything for the Sonic franchise since its put the staff in a mindset that people prefer a Mario experience thus Sonic must be a Mario experience, that very mindset leading to Lost World itself which they marketed as for Mario fans in the end.

But... Given recent statements by the company, I suppose they are changing that mindset and have realized people want Sonic to be Sonic and Mario to be Mario no matter how "bro" the situation today may be.

[Kuzu]

I feel like saying Sonic "is for kids" is an incorrect statement. Yes, the target demographic is definitely about 5-12, but saying "its for kids" implies that there is nothing for anyone 13 and up to enjoy out of the series. Obviously that statement is wrong because I'm almost certain everyone in this thread is at least 18 and up :V If Sonic was simply for kids, I don't think any of us would even be on this site to begin with.

Regardless, Sonic has such widespread appeal because its a franchise that's been around for over two decades. For many people, it was one of their first introduction to video games and may be why they're gamers to begin with. This is in addition to gaining new fans that discover the series thorough all of the newer material. So really, its more appropriate to say Sonic is a family orientated franchise because of those factors. I mean, he's Rated E for Everyone. I don't think the term "everyone" simply means "Children".

You want my opinion, yea Sonic Team don't really keep all of their demographics in mind, because I don't see much of a reason why there can't be a game that appeals to both older and newer players alike without feeling like its pandering to either crowd, but I digress.

 

As for the OP...or at least what I'm interpreting what they're trying to say; I feel there are a lot of buzzwords in those quotes. "Be good, not popular" Well what's considered good and what's considered popular in this case, who are those quotes even referring to and what about them relates to Sonic? I don't wanna take quotes out of context and then misinterpret them because then I'm just going to draw the wrong conclusions. So OP, what are you even trying to say ?

 

Nowadays it's more like "We do what Ninten-Does!" especially after Lost World.

This goes hand in hand with my argument about having a target audience in the past but at the same time clearly being open to targeting others, albeit unintentionally perhaps but still an inclusive experience for those who weren't the focus.

I really can't say the whole SonicxMario bro-ship has done anything for the Sonic franchise since its put the staff in a mindset that people prefer a Mario experience thus Sonic must be a Mario experience, that very mindset leading to Lost World itself which they marketed as for Mario fans in the end.

But... Given recent statements by the company, I suppose they are changing that mindset and have realized people want Sonic to be Sonic and Mario to be Mario no matter how "bro" the situation today may be.

 

I also don't understand this; what about Lost World's marketing made it seem like it was targeted towards Mario fans? Because they're both brightly colored platformers? That seems incredibly broad and generalizing. Not saying that Lost World's aesthetics don't remind you of Mario, but I highly doubt Sonic Team's thought process was "Let's make a game exactly like Mario, and put Sonic in it". 

Edited December 3, 2015 by Kuzu the Boloedge

[Idon'tcare]

I also don't understand this; what about Lost World's marketing made it seem like it was targeted towards Mario fans? Because they're both brightly colored platformers? That seems incredibly broad and generalizing. Not saying that Lost World's aesthetics don't remind you of Mario, but I highly doubt Sonic Team's thought process was "Let's make a game exactly like Mario, and put Sonic in it". 

I'm going by 3 year old memories from a forum full of negative Sonic fans, but I believe it was Iizuka who said in an interview doing the production of the game that Sonic Lost world was created to appeal to the Mario fans.

Personally, I would have aimed for the Ratchet and Clank fans instead.  No offense intended, but Sonic has more in common with that series then it does with Mario.

[Chris Knopps]

I'm going by 3 year old memories from a forum full of negative Sonic fans, but I believe it was Iizuka who said in an interview doing the production of the game that Sonic Lost world was created to appeal to the Mario fans.

Personally, I would have aimed for the Ratchet and Clank fans instead.  No offense intended, but Sonic has more in common with that series then it does with Mario.

Bingo my friend. It was indeed the almighty himself that said it was for the Mario fans.

Sonic... Is for Mario fans... Oh the tears the 90's weeps. lmfao

[Kuzu]

If he said this, where's the source? You're probably right, but I need some evidence too.

Edited December 3, 2015 by Kuzu the Boloedge

[Chris Knopps]

If he said this, where's the source? You're probably right, but I need some evidence too.

http://www.gamnesia.com/news/sega-aims-to-win-back-mario-fans-with-lost-world

That Mario focus. lol

Kinda funny that the game wound up panned to the core because of being like a Mario game which so many seemingly screamed for over the years, then got it and hated it. Plus take in the fact the staff at SEGA claimed Mario to be the superior franchise then got canned because of believing this.

Gotta have faith in your own product if you expect it to sell.

Edited December 3, 2015 by Chris Knopps