Why don't you take Sonic seriously?

[SBR2]

Honestly I think when Sonic games try to be serious business they come off way more childish than the games where Sonic's just having an adventure and cracking jokes.

[StaticMania]

The only reason people can't take Sonic seriously is because of his baggage...

 

Sonic came right out the 3D gate with a not so good start with its storytelling.

 

And aside from the occasional exception, things got worse game after game.

[Multikaris]

On 8/19/2017 at 8:37 AM, Dr. Mechano said:

I mean, look at the Mario RPGs.

There's your "short human" with a bunch of games that skillfully balance comedy and drama, creating lovable, charming games that don't shy away from the series' whimsical, cartoonish nature in order to tell more serious stories.

The Mario RPGs embrace Mario's bright, colorful, silly aesthetics and manage to tell more grounded, serious stories within that framework. The Sonic games, by contrast, seem almost ashamed of their more lighthearted roots and try to downplay them as much as possible in games like Shadow, 2k6, etc.

So is Megaman X, Zero, ZX, and Starforce more akin to the Sonic games in their darkness and thus awkward? What about the darker storylines that came up occasionally in Classic, Legends, and especially BN? And I also think Spider-Man Homecoming is a great example of this sort of deal, as is a lot of modern kids tv. I enjoyed the film despite how silly it was because it had genuine charm. 

Now I wonder what a Sonic game in the vein of the Mario RPGs would be like, and a truly dark Mario that puts away it’s innocent roots, akin to Megaman X-ZX and Sonic. 

 

And why is it so wrong to fully put away whimsical nature? Dark Knight Saga and Man of Steel did it well enough, BvS did it terribly.

[Dr. Mechano]

18 minutes ago, Miragnarok said:

And why is it so wrong to fully put away whimsical nature? Dark Knight Saga and Man of Steel did it well enough, BvS did it terribly.

Dark Knight saga had whimsy. I mean, it had the Joker, who - despite being intimidating and dangerous - still made, y'know, jokes. His villainy was still peppered with comedic shtick and showboating.

Like, it was a darker interpretation of Batman than, say, the DCAU was. But it still didn't "fully put away whimsical nature," as you put it.

[Multikaris]

4 minutes ago, Dr. Mechano said:

Dark Knight saga had whimsy. I mean, it had the Joker, who - despite being intimidating and dangerous - still made, y'know, jokes. His villainy was still peppered with comedic shtick and showboating.

Like, it was a darker interpretation of Batman than, say, the DCAU was. But it still didn't "fully put away whimsical nature," as you put it.

Yes, I know. But Mario’s never been as dark as even the DCAU, whereas in something like Sonic or Megaman, good characters die horribly and in vain, genocide is common, oppressive governments watch people’s every move and trample their freedoms... 

 

And also I wouldn’t really call Joker’s jokes “whimsical”... 

[Splash the Otter]

I never liked the Blue Hedgehog Fallacy, as I call it. I mean look at Kirby. His games are usually bright and colorful and full of dreams, but they still take themselves seriously. And if a series about a pink ball that inhales enemies to copy their power can be taken seriously then so can one about a blue hedgehog.

[BaronGrackle]

I must be missing something. People take Mario and Kirby seriously?

If so, I don't know what "seriously" actually means here.

[Tara]

In the context of Kirby and Mario, I feel like "seriously" would be used to mean that people are generally willing to suspend their disbelief that the series can carry itself narratively without constantly needing to lampshade the unrealistic nature.  This is something that Mario and Kirby do benefit from, whereas there is an argument in recent years that because Sonic is a blue hedgehog that runs fast, that somehow means any kind of story context can subsequently not be believed, no matter how equally outlandish.  Both Mario and Kirby tell stories that range from funny to heartwarming and even sometimes sad, whereas Sonic is seen as odd for attempting along the same lines.

However, the discussion in this topic seems to teeter more on "what level of darkness is appropriate for the series," and how Sonic's image as a kid-friendly hedgehog could restrict him from approaching darker, more down to earth narratives.  The discussion is a bit broad and nebulous anyway, though.

[Splash the Otter]

29 minutes ago, BaronGrackle said:

I must be missing something. People take Mario and Kirby seriously?

If so, I don't know what "seriously" actually means here.

"Serious" doesn't necessarily mean "dark and edgy". Kirby takes itself seriously because it doesn't try to remind you that it's a game series, or dwell on the more absurd elements. Kirby's Epic Yarn was set in a world made of fabric, but the premise was played straight and that's what allowed it to work.

31 minutes ago, Tara said:

In the context of Kirby and Mario, I feel like "seriously" would be used to mean that people are generally willing to suspend their disbelief that the series can carry itself narratively without constantly needing to lampshade the unrealistic nature.  This is something that Mario and Kirby do benefit from, whereas there is an argument in recent years that because Sonic is a blue hedgehog that runs fast, that somehow means any kind of story context can subsequently not be believed, no matter how equally outlandish.  Both Mario and Kirby tell stories that range from funny to heartwarming and even sometimes sad, whereas Sonic is seen as odd for attempting along the same lines.

Yes, it's a very annoying double standard.

[Dr. Mechano]

1 hour ago, BaronGrackle said:

I must be missing something. People take Mario and Kirby seriously?

If so, I don't know what "seriously" actually means here.

Play the RPGs.*

They have genuinely good character development and heartwarming moments. A story doesn't have to be grim or dark to have those things, or to be taken seriously. Heck, in the platformers, even Galaxy and Odyssey have traces of that.

*Except for Sticker Star and Color Splash. They're trash and don't count.

[BaronGrackle]

47 minutes ago, Tara said:

In the context of Kirby and Mario, I feel like "seriously" would be used to mean that people are generally willing to suspend their disbelief that the series can carry itself narratively without constantly needing to lampshade the unrealistic nature.  This is something that Mario and Kirby do benefit from, whereas there is an argument in recent years that because Sonic is a blue hedgehog that runs fast, that somehow means any kind of story context can subsequently not be believed, no matter how equally outlandish.  Both Mario and Kirby tell stories that range from funny to heartwarming and even sometimes sad, whereas Sonic is seen as odd for attempting along the same lines.

However, the discussion in this topic seems to teeter more on "what level of darkness is appropriate for the series," and how Sonic's image as a kid-friendly hedgehog could restrict him from approaching darker, more down to earth narratives.  The discussion is a bit broad and nebulous anyway, though.

Methinks it's just harder to suspend disbelief when the blue hedgehog is trying to be "realistic". Or when he lives on "Earth".

That was sort of a feature of the Dreamcast Era up through Sonic 06 (with Sonic Heroes as a notable exception).

[A person, that exists]

Because it's a game about a bunch of stupid talking animals with no lore or character development to speak of.

To take things seriously you need CONTEXT, and WORLD BUILDING, something that "Gotta Go Fast" simply can't provide. The concept of Sonic the Hedgehog is stupid on it's own, and when Sega tries to build a world and make DRAMA out of this it just sounds dumb.

Not to mention that having happy red echidnas and hedgehogs talk about the horrors of war rather than making jokes about their stupidity is just plain cute. But, then again, making the game stupid kiddy shit like in Colors is kind of a bad decision too, because that game is way too sterile to be over-the-top with it's jokes OR it's gameplay.

The best way to fix it would be to make it a bit more like Metal Slug. That game had cartoony aesthetics and over-the top stuff, but it didn't have food jokes or constant 4th wall breaks. 

Also, can I just say that Sonic is literally an official meme at this point? Even if the games will get Shakespeare-level storytelling, I would still find it awful, because it's played by Sonic "Sanic" the Hedgehog and Knuckles "Do u kno da wey?" the Echidna.

There should be no drama/seriousness/realism in Sonic, because it's dumb. Sonic and co are just brainless moneymaking puppets, just like Ronal McDonald and friends, so seeing them DEVELOP and EMOTE is just the funniest fucking thing to me. 

[A person, that exists]

I regret everything I've said

[Monkey Destruction Switch]

4 hours ago, A person, that exists said:

Because it's a game about a bunch of stupid talking animals with no lore or character development to speak of.

4 hours ago, A person, that exists said:

To take things seriously you need CONTEXT, and WORLD BUILDING, something that "Gotta Go Fast" simply can't provide. The concept of Sonic the Hedgehog is stupid on it's own, and when Sega tries to build a world and make DRAMA out of this it just sounds dumb.

4 hours ago, A person, that exists said:

There should be no drama/seriousness/realism in Sonic, because it's dumb. Sonic and co are just brainless moneymaking puppets, just like Ronal McDonald and friends, so seeing them DEVELOP and EMOTE is just the funniest fucking thing to me. 

I'm glad you regret everything you said, because I'm sick of your ridiculous exaggerations and making everything in the series sound stupider than it really is. I'll be the first to admit that lore and characterizations in the Sonic series aren't that strong because they're so inconsistent and oftentimes pretty shallow, but that's still a far cry from not existing at all. And I don't get how you can keep saying the Sonic series at the very core of its concept is stupid and dumb and all the characters are meaningless puppets without making the slightest effort to explain why you feel that way, other than just "they're colorful animals", which is...not an explanation at all. This is certainly not the only topic you've done this in either, and it's beginning to get on my nerves.

[Osmium]

I honestly have no idea if I have posted in this topic before (and I'm not bothering to look) but I have a question for the OP; why do YOU take Sonic seriously? 

What makes people put Sonic on a different level of expectations from any other older IP such as Crash or even Mario when it comes to seriousness? People treat Crash and Mario pretty damn lightly and take them as they are; colourful worlds with unrealistic parameters building them up that serve the basis for cool gameplay ideas. It's always when it comes to Sonic people want to start talking about how dark and badass it is for reasons that haven't been relevant either in the past decade or the games that created this IP in the first place. Sonic is Felix the Cat and Eggman is Teddy Roosevelt fighting over woodland animals in a roller coaster world. Doesn't mean it's for babies but I don't see what about that is meant to be badass and specifically searching for an older audience. 

I don't understand why conversations about tone get some controversial with Sonic. It was created and surrounded by, like I said IPs like Crash and Mario and Megaman and cartoons like Animaniacs and Ren and Stimpy which simply sought a distinctive silly world for every age. It's not common to see people complain about these not being taken seriously. 

The largest argument against my position are the years of the series which took more influence from Anime and the Archie comics during the Ken Penders days. The thing is that neither of these are really relevant to the series at all anymore, they were a niche that brought in a certain selection of people looking for something that doesn't exist anymore. Forces tried in some capacity to bring back that style and completely failed at it. Even the games during the darker period weren't really that dark; the Adventure games and Heroes were still silly. Shadow and 06 are the only really grimdark ones, and even the majority of people looking for serious Sonic would still write those off as bad, so yeah. 

[FlameStream]

I can totally understand the appeal in wanting to have a setting that is more... believable, I guess that's the term. It doesn't necessarily need to be "dark" , or "serious" or anything (though dipping into those situations timely can certainly help), just appealing, not goofy, not one-dimensional. I think Forces tried to do a bit of that, and while the execution wasn't phenomenal, I'd like them to pursue exploring that general idea.

A great example I have in mind that has has been done in the past is Solatorobo. It's in a setting similar to Sonic where the main casts are animal (Well, mostly cats and dogs but hey). I think it managed a great balance in tone, conflict and iteration. Plus a pretty expansive world, many factions and thought out cultures. I'd love to see something similar done with Sonic.

[dbzfan7]

By serious I only ask they accept their world, embrace their world, and not basically treat themselves as stand up comedians. The minute they reject the innate silliness of their world by pointing out how dumb that is, or how silly it is, the minute I stop carrying.

[SpongicX]

I can’t take him seriously, because Sega refuses to take him seriously. It’s pretty sad when even Sega are making fun of the series with memes...

[Multikaris]

6 hours ago, A crocodile said:

I honestly have no idea if I have posted in this topic before (and I'm not bothering to look) but I have a question for the OP; why do YOU take Sonic seriously? 

What makes people put Sonic on a different level of expectations from any other older IP such as Crash or even Mario when it comes to seriousness? People treat Crash and Mario pretty damn lightly and take them as they are; colourful worlds with unrealistic parameters building them up that serve the basis for cool gameplay ideas. It's always when it comes to Sonic people want to start talking about how dark and badass it is for reasons that haven't been relevant either in the past decade or the games that created this IP in the first place. Sonic is Felix the Cat and Eggman is Teddy Roosevelt fighting over woodland animals in a roller coaster world. Doesn't mean it's for babies but I don't see what about that is meant to be badass and specifically searching for an older audience. 

I don't understand why conversations about tone get some controversial with Sonic. It was created and surrounded by, like I said IPs like Crash and Mario and Megaman and cartoons like Animaniacs and Ren and Stimpy which simply sought a distinctive silly world for every age. It's not common to see people complain about these not being taken seriously. 

The largest argument against my position are the years of the series which took more influence from Anime and the Archie comics during the Ken Penders days. The thing is that neither of these are really relevant to the series at all anymore, they were a niche that brought in a certain selection of people looking for something that doesn't exist anymore. Forces tried in some capacity to bring back that style and completely failed at it. Even the games during the darker period weren't really that dark; the Adventure games and Heroes were still silly. Shadow and 06 are the only really grimdark ones, and even the majority of people looking for serious Sonic would still write those off as bad, so yeah. 

Megaman itself became more serious and animu with their later series for the most part. Is there any reason Sonic can’t?

[Razule]

7 hours ago, A crocodile said:

What makes people put Sonic on a different level of expectations from any other older IP such as Crash or even Mario when it comes to seriousness?

 

7 hours ago, A crocodile said:

the years of the series which took more influence from Anime and the Archie comics during the Ken Penders days.

Answered your own question. No matter it's reception, it was an actual era of the series that people grew up with and got attached to.

[Tara]

Even if SatAM, the Archie comics, and the mid-2000's games didn't exist, it's not as though a series can't evolve and change its approach.  The fact that 80's TMNT exists does not stop the current, slightly darker incarnations from existing.  The fact that the Adam West Batman TV show exists does not keep The Killing Joke from existing.  Speaking of DC, they recently did a series of crossovers with Looney Tunes with darker, alternate takes on the characters that were surprisingly well received.  Doesn't make their basic concept any less silly, but it shows that even the most inane concepts can tell stories that speak to people.

I generally prefer Sonic to be lighthearted and fun and cartoony, but I think it's a bit silly to assume that it's the only way he can be.  Especially when the series already has plenty of outings to indicate how it might or might not work.  Like, even if it's not something I personally want, I don't quite get this argument that because the more serious parts of the series are not currently relevant that people can't want them to, you know, be relevant again?  Or at the very least, want something that encompasses the same general spirit?

 

[superman43]

On 19. 2. 2018 at 3:26 AM, BaronGrackle said:

Methinks it's just harder to suspend disbelief when the blue hedgehog is trying to be "realistic". Or when he lives on "Earth".

That was sort of a feature of the Dreamcast Era up through Sonic 06 (with Sonic Heroes as a notable exception).

Plus Sonic Unleashed.

[BaronGrackle]

4 hours ago, superman43 said:

Plus Sonic Unleashed.

Unleashed is a weird case. On the one hand, it had human towns and a world map resembling ours. On the other hand, it used a silly western animation style that let the humans blend instead of clash (Mario would've looked fine here) and didn't involve massive government conspiracies.

Is the world shown in Adventure, Unleashed, and Forces all the same place?

[superman43]

12 minutes ago, BaronGrackle said:

Unleashed is a weird case. On the one hand, it had human towns and a world map resembling ours. On the other hand, it used a silly western animation style that let the humans blend instead of clash (Mario would've looked fine here) and didn't involve massive government conspiracies.

Is the world shown in Adventure, Unleashed, and Forces all the same place?

I believe that whether the world is same or not depends on everyone´s thoughts. You may say they are happening in one world as well as that human´s and Sonic´s world are two different worlds.

[NegaMix]

13 hours ago, Tara said:

Even if SatAM, the Archie comics, and the mid-2000's games didn't exist, it's not as though a series can't evolve and change its approach.  The fact that 80's TMNT exists does not stop the current, slightly darker incarnations from existing.  The fact that the Adam West Batman TV show exists does not keep The Killing Joke from existing.  Speaking of DC, they recently did a series of crossovers with Looney Tunes with darker, alternate takes on the characters that were surprisingly well received.  Doesn't make their basic concept any less silly, but it shows that even the most inane concepts can tell stories that speak to people.

I generally prefer Sonic to be lighthearted and fun and cartoony, but I think it's a bit silly to assume that it's the only way he can be.  Especially when the series already has plenty of outings to indicate how it might or might not work.  Like, even if it's not something I personally want, I don't quite get this argument that because the more serious parts of the series are not currently relevant that people can't want them to, you know, be relevant again?  Or at the very least, want something that encompasses the same general spirit?

While I do agree with this, there's something about those examples that I think is worth noting.

As you said, 80's TMNT existing doesn't prevent other, darker versions from existing later on. Much in the same way that the original Image Comics TMNT didn't stop the lighter 80's version from existing. However, each continuity was also not only separate from one another, but also generally consistent with their individual tones. For example, 60's Batman never became similar in tone to something like The Killing Joke, as it wouldn't really work for that particular interpretation of Batman.

With Sonic, however, I don't think it's as simple. Sure, the game series also has its own alternate interpretations/continuities, in the form of various comics and TV shows. But they're all distinctly seperate continuities from the games (some more so than others) and often keep a general consistency in their individual tones. The games themselves, on the other hand, aren't as simple. Post-Sonic Adventure, I'd argue that the tone of the series became something of a mess, with some games trying to be dark and serious, others being lighthearted and comical, and then there were a few that went somewhere down the middle.

And yet, all these inconsistent, flip-flopping tones were seemingly being presented as one singular continuity. A continuity where one day, a cartoon hedgehog is cursing, shooting people with guns, and stopping ugly aliens from devouring the world... and then later, another cartoon hedgehog is quipping joke after joke while rescuing cute little aliens from a goofy fat scientist. There's no consistency! And that makes it almost impossible for me, to be able to say what the game series' tone even is anymore!

I suppose what I'm trying to say is... I wouldn't mind future Sonic games having a different tone from the classics (and heck, thanks to Forces, they now have the excuse of Modern Sonic being a separate incarnation from the original). But I think they need to pick a general tone for the series going forward, and stick with it. No drastically changing it every two games. Wanna make Modern Sonic a series filled with epic adventures, and a dose of drama? I'm fine with that, but keep it consistent.

...Er, this came out a lot longer than I thought it would. Anyway, I hope I could get my viewpoint across.