The State of Sonic Team

[MegasonicZX]

1 hour ago, FriesWithoutKetchup said:

Are there any people on this site who don't have a fiery burning hatred for Sega and Sonic Team? X_X

I don't hate sonic team but I am (reasonably) disappointed in their output lately and i'm leaning more in the camp that's asking for them to be removed from the entire equation (which if you had asked me back in 2014, i'd be thinking differently).

[Osmium]

1 hour ago, FriesWithoutKetchup said:

Are there any people on this site who don't have a fiery burning hatred for Sega and Sonic Team? X_X

Having criticisms of someone/something equals fiery burning hatred totally. 

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

1 hour ago, SaberX said:

Well spoken.

The irony is that people call Mania a "fan made game". And that same game did beter than their precious Forces.

 Can both sides just not pull the while tribalizing and demonizing either game, shtick like this? I mean,  even people who like the game acknowledge it's essentially an official fanmade game. 

That's not even inherently a bad thing. 

[CrashRatchetFan]

4 hours ago, Yeow said:

I wouldn't necessarily say that. Platform exclusivity isn't always a weakness, nor is a multiplatform release always a strength.  Crash has been multiplatform for years, yet his most popular games (in both reviews and sales) are exclusively tied to the original PlayStation trilogy. N-Sane's success is arguably an example of Crash (re-)tapping into the brand synergy the series originally had with the PlayStation platform and its audience--it not only sold well right out the gate, N-Sane is now the best-selling game in the series after the PS1 era of ND games.

Platform/console exclusivity also allows you to save resources in regards to how many platforms a developer and publisher will have to develop, market, and release a game on. So even if Forces hypothetically was able to match N-Sane's 2.5M sales in the span of three months, N-Sane would likely have the higher profit margins due to N-Sane's production scope pooled towards only the PS4; compared to Forces spread out across the PS4, Xbox One, Switch, and PC.

It also helped that N. Sane itself was marketed as a “straight-up” remaster with little nuances to make the games better to play and experience (such as easing Crash 1’s bullshit difficulty and playable Coco) so those got the attention of casuals and such. Not to mention good PR like weekly gameplay trailers and the idle animation contest and such. Forces didn’t get that kind of “attention” until like, two weeks before release and it was just sporadic and mediocre because of how much of a letdown it was. 

Also, people wanted Crash. As weird as it may sound but the near decade long hiatus did Crash a good thing. All the shouting and begging after the numerous subtle hints and teasers, they listened and it tremendously paid off. 

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

3 minutes ago, SaberX said:

And why do you think Mania is supposed to be a fan game?

It's a fan game made official pretty much. It's a game made by fans for fans and that's fine by me.

I mean, we have to remember, the series' showrunners, Sonic and Eggman respectively were both fan made characters picked from a contest back in the day. If anything, a fangame made official in this regard is a compliment (and if we're lucky Eggette will see such luck as well).

5 minutes ago, SaberX said:

Not that this is a bad thing. But the ones I talked about that called Mania a "fan made game" had the intention of demoralize the game. Simply as that.

Understandable, but it's not really taking the high ground dogging Forces back. That game's not amazing like it should've been, but I wouldn't even really call it bad, let alone worth putting on a pedestal of some other fan faction's idolization, especially when there's nothing to suggest all those people in question even really support Forces themselves. Just saying, it helps to specify which folk you have a beef with.

No biggie. I'm sure you didn't mean too much ill intent.

[Wraith]

1 hour ago, FriesWithoutKetchup said:

Are there any people on this site who don't have a fiery burning hatred for Sega and Sonic Team? X_X

I don't have a relationship with them. They're making a product that they want us to buy. We're free to say what we think of it.

This product also represents them so they should probably chose not to represent themselves so poorly. I don't really have a reason to take them seriously as developers and haven't for a while.

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

9 hours ago, Josh said:

They are both 3D Platformers released for struggling brands. Crash is at a huge disadvantage with being a console exclusive. Sonic should have by all means outsold Crash, but it's clear now that didn't happen. That's pretty terrible on Sonic's part.

Both Mania and Crash dumping on Sonic Forces should be an indicator to Sega how important word of mouth is. Quality matters for Sonic now far more than it did 10 years ago. All the bad games they released have caught up to them.

The onlu way out of this rut is to release quality games. Throwing out gimmicks and bait to hook people isn't going to work anymore.

Therein lies a great issue with SEGA of Japan. Their ego and jealousy tend to get in the way of making quality games, as has shown in the old days, around 2006 with their reboot to make Sonic supposedly the "right way", and while Forces wasn't bad, early talk about the Avatar overshadowing Sonic in that plot before SoA and SEGA in general shook their heads at Sonic Team Japan's take.....yeah, the pattern is quite apparent compared to SEGA of America's  bouts of success.

And don't even get me started on SEGA of Europes' own blunders. Seriously what is up with the lack of communication between everyone??

[Sean]

30 minutes ago, JovahexeonXMAS Tron Bonne said:

It's a fan game made official pretty much. It's a game made by fans for fans and that's fine by me.

Sonic Mania is not a "fangame made official" because it's not a fangame. Just because it was made by people who are fans of the series doesn't automatically make it a fangame. By that logic, Pluto by Naoki Urasawa is an Astro Boy doujinshi. Taxman Sonic CD, 1, and 2 are fan remakes. Peter Jackson's The Lord of the Rings movies are fanmovies of the books. Andrew Garfield is a Spider-Man cosplayer in the ASM films. Archie Sonic became a Sonic fancomic when Ian was hired. You don't see people accusing these things of being fanworks made official, and therefore it doesn't make sense to call Mania the same thing.

Actual examples of fangames made official are Black Mesa and Mega Man x Street Fighter. Why? Because these actually started out as a fangames.

Quote

I mean, we have to remember, the series' showrunners, Sonic and Eggman respectively were both fan made characters picked from a contest back in the day. If anything, a fangame made official in this regard is a compliment (and if we're lucky Eggette will see such luck as well).

No. What? no.

How in the blazing hell are Sonic and Eggman "fancharacters made official"? Are you talking about how they were conceived via an internal contest Sega had among their employees to come up with the mascots for their next big game. That's not the same thing as making a fancharacter official. That's not in the same ballpark. It's not even in the same solar system. They had their own employees try to make these characters, they didn't pull some character off some random artist's Twitter just because people liked the designs. None of these employees were fans in the first place because how the hell can you be a fan of something that doesn't even fucking exist yet? You might as well literally call every single character ever made in the history of video games, books, movies, and other media fancharacters of their own works.

Also that Eggman niece fancharacter is never going to be made official, ever, unless Sega outright buys the rights to her design from the original artist like what Valve did for TF2's announcer. Why the hell are people so crazily obsessed with this character in particular? There's tons of fancharacters out there and I don't see what makes this particular one inherently more special that makes it more deserving of being in an official game than any other random one you see on Deviantart.

[Dee Dude]

13 minutes ago, Sean said:

Also that Eggman niece fancharacter is never going to be made official, ever, unless Sega outright buys the rights to her design from the original artist like what Valve did for TF2's announcer. Why the hell are people so crazily obsessed with this character in particular? There's tons of fancharacters out there and I don't see what makes this particular one inherently more special that makes it more deserving of being in an official game than any other random one you see on Deviantart.

It may have to due with the fact that she isn’t a typical anthro like every other Sonic OC and how she was created literally because of a easy misinterpretation in Mania and not from the mind itself.

She pretty much ironically became popular because of how she was drawn as a joke so people became fascinated with her sharing the same charm as Eggman and not being a usual animal as I said before.

So it’s not really hard to see her being a stand out from others and why people want her canon (even I kinda do a little),  but I admit that I never saw the big deal in her either. If she’s made canon then cool, whatever.

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

2 minutes ago, Sean said:

Why the hell are people so obsessed with this character in particular?

I'm honestly more confused with why people get so peeved at her popularity. Or at people asking for her to be canon. I mean, no one thought SEGA would hire fans to make an official Sonic game and look what happened. Also, I don't get folks who find it necessary wasting time shouting at them that she'll never be canon. That noise just makes me roll my eyes.

Who knows? Sega might catch on the insane popularity wave she's riding and bite the bullet. Might not even be that big an expense.

3 minutes ago, Sean said:

By that logic, Pluto by Naoki Urasawa is an Astro Boy doujinshi.

*Shrug* Okay?

3 minutes ago, Sean said:

Peter Jackson's The Lord of the Rings movies are fanmovies of the books.

Err, not really, Those are film adaptations of licensed material. Sonic Mania while a part of the franchise is by no means, an adaptation.

4 minutes ago, Sean said:

Andrew Garfield is a Spider-Man cosplayer in the ASM films.

That analogy doesn't even make sense.

9 minutes ago, Sean said:

Archie Sonic became a Sonic fancomic when Ian was hired.

That's quite the opposite of what I'm even insinuating. When some people say that Mania is fangame made official. They're referring to how it plays like Sonic fangames (obviously the better ones) and it does have its roots in such considering a part of its origins and creators. I think it might being getting taken too seriously and heated in quite a few regards when it's given without mean intent.

[Zaysho]

3 minutes ago, JovahexeonXMAS Tron Bonne said:

Err, not really, Those are film adaptations of licensed material. Sonic Mania while a part of the franchise is by no means, an adaptation.

It's a game commissioned by the official IP holder. Most of its staff coming from the fan community is irrelevant. I say this as someone who rolled his eyes at the initial trailer and reactions and held the "corporate backed fangame" view for a while, but I came around to realizing that's stupid and completely undermines the work that went into it.

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

1 minute ago, Zaysho said:

"corporate backed fangame" view

That's not the view I'm describing. In case that's what you're fearing I'm talking about. The version I'm describing is more just an acknowledgement of roots as opposed to belittling the talent and results out of an otherwise, fantastic game.

[Sean]

12 minutes ago, JovahexeonXMAS Tron Bonne said:

*Shrug* Okay?

Err, not really, Those are film adaptations of licensed material. Sonic Mania while a part of the franchise is by no means, an adaptation.

That analogy doesn't even make sense.

Naoki Urasawa was a huge fan of Osamu Tezuka before he went on to create a manga based on one of Astro Boy's most famous storylines.

Peter Jackson was a huge fan of Tolkien's books before he went on to make the movies.

Andrew Garfield was a huge Spider-Man fan before he went on to play Spidey himself.

Ian was a well-known fanfic/fancomic creator in the Sonic community before he went on to become the comics' lead writer.

 

My point is that all of these works involved people who were fans of these franchises before becoming a part of them in an official capacity but that doesn't render the stuff they were involved in fanworks of their respective properties because they are all officially licensed material. Which, y'know, Mania also is, and was commissioned as such.

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

@Sean Thanks for the context. That helps chunks. Still,  I think this is a misunderstanding on the value of the words in question.

At no point did I ever call Mania anything that's not official,  to be fair. 

[Nicky Nicardo]

2 hours ago, Osmium said:

Having criticisms of someone/something equals fiery burning hatred totally. 

 Except I never said that simply having criticisms equals fiery burning hatred. I’m specifically talking about what I consider to be overly angry and spiteful reactions and put-downs.

 

 I could’ve been more clear about that, but yeah. I would never say that simply criticizing something is an overly negative overreaction. 

[Celestia]

In general I don't mind people calling Mania a "fan game" because I assume they usually mean just "game made by fans," which is in part what it is. If anything "fan game made official" makes even less sense because that's not at all what happened. "Fan game" doesn't technically fit either since, as far as I've ever known, it specifically refers to games that are not just made by fans but are completely unofficial, but...yeah. Semantics, I guess.

RE: the fan character: I don't think it's impossible she could end up in something canon. Not in the games of course, I can't see SoJ being aware of any of this or having much interest anyway. Instead I could see SoA approaching the original artist to use the character in the comics or something. But even putting aside legal issues, there's another obstacle specific to this character's concept: the mandate against (most) game characters being related to adaptation-specific characters. It's possible they've revised the "rules" and such in between Archie Sonic's cancellation and IDW Sonic's production, but I kind of doubt that one has changed since it's...not an unreasonable one (imo).

[Nicky Nicardo]

1 hour ago, Josh said:

I don't have a relationship with them. They're making a product that they want us to buy. We're free to say what we think of it.

This product also represents them so they should probably chose not to represent themselves so poorly. I don't really have a reason to take them seriously as developers and haven't for a while.

 I never said that anyone wasn’t free to say whatever they like about them. By all means, say whatever you feel. However, that also means other people are allowed to say how they feel, and I personally feel like a lot of the “criticism quote that I’m seeing towards them is taking things too far and being unnecessarily angry and cruel.

[Mad Convoy]

Getting back onto the topic of Sonic Team proper.

I was thinking about the The Blog Sega Doesn't Want You To Read and how it revealed how tired and exhausted Sonic Team was during the tail end of the Adventure era. Every now and then people bring it up as relevant to what Sonic Team is like now, assuming that the games that dissatisfied them were the result of not caring or lack of effort. Its easy to see why. Basically every leak about the late Adventure era points towards this and even some stuff from the Classic era points towards issues with lack of morale and frustrations with slowly decreasing creative ownership in Sonic Team. And Sonic Team has been pretty tight-lipped about any issues its been having these days-- to be expected, as post-2007 Sonic is considered recent in terms of Sonic history, not to mention that despite post-2007 being very polarizing (and let's leave it at that...), it is still enjoyed by some enough for the most part that developers don't want to risk their careers talking about it.

But that blog leak also came mere months before a massive staff-gutting and restructure across Sonic Team and Sega that would be the first of many. No really, if there's anything to define Sonic Team and Sega post-2007 that doesn't include any game output, its restructures. There's a lot of talk about Team A and Team B, but they ceased to exist after Generations and were rather open and ever-changing conglomerates to begin with. It would be more accurate to describe Sonic Team as being more of a studio-brand these days-- a snappy title for the people were hired to plan, make or help with Sonic game development in some way and rarely used for side projects that happen to be mostly made by the same people who are making a recent enough Sonic game. Unleashed, Colors, Generations, Lost World, etc. shared some folks, but for the most part the staffing was wildly different. And that's pretty easy to see in the output. Unleashed's, Colors's, and Generations's respective development teams turned out product with consistent gameplay styles because there was a ton of overlap between Team A and Team B that helped all sides coordinate their ideas, but even then, you can tell some of the team's different philosophies in terms of spectacle, gameplay priorities, quality versus quantity, level design, 3D levels vs 2D levels, and so much more. And Lost World... okay it has some things in common with Generations and Colors but is for the most part completely different... and Forces likewise has a lot in common with Generations and Colors but Forces was clearly made with different structure and intentions in mind. Compare that to the Adventure games, which for all their faults did have a consistent structure and development philosophies, as well as clear intent to make  "SA1 and SA2 but better and with new playstyles" (intent is the key word there and let's leave it at that).

Its interesting how it works. Pre-2007 Sonic Team produces good Classic games only to follow up with wildly inconsistent at best games, but said games have the benefit of a clear goal and consistant staff. Whereas Post-2007 produces games of much more consistent and in many ways higher quality than pre-2007 Sonic Team ever did, but at the cost of lacking a clear direction and consistant staff. I point this out to affirm that the previous paragraph is not to bash on any iteration of Sonic Team, because there's plenty of opportunity to learn from both pre-2007 and post-2007 Sonic Team's setups and philosophies.

This tells me that The Blog Sega Doesn't Want You To Read, and by extension other testimonies from the Adventure and Classic Era, aren't relevant to Sonic Team's current state because Sonic Team is not being run the way it was back in the Adventure and Classic era. Its not a sweatshop where staff are the slaves of Sega and have to churn out a new game every year or something. Its more like Sega saw how problematic that kind of structure was for Sonic game quality, and instead of seeing that the problem was Sonic Team not adapting to the increasing need for more development time in video games and too little creative freedom to thrive, it just decided to bump up your typical Sonic development time to two to three years and assumed that would be good forever and frequently change the staff with every game to keep people from being overworked. Hey, give Sega some credit, it did rightly identify that overworking was amongst the worst problems with pre-2007 Sonic Team and chose a solution that would at least alleviate some of the excesses. Its shows, trust me. But it went about solving it in the most backwards way imaginable. It successfully solves one type of inconsistency in Sonic games but does so with yet another type of inconsistency... and frankly I still don't think Sonic Team gets enough creative control these days.

I mean, I'm all for criticizing developers and even specific people who screwed up. Accountability is good. But at the same time, false accountability is highly toxic. Right now, I really don't see how Sonic Team's problems are lack of trying, lack of caring, or sheer incompetence. (I think this is what @FriesWithoutKetchup was trying to ask people to explain their reasoning for, but she went about it the wrong way) Actually, I don't really see how Sonic Team is the number one driving force of Sonic-related trash in general-- it seems like Sega's godawful management and structure is the main source of most of the problems with the Sonic franchise.

And to that, you may say, why does it matter who fucked it up if the end product is fucked up? Well, it matters as its the best from my perspective (though not only) way to avoid the aforementioned false accountability, and it has the added bonus of making sure that when people do criticize the developers and publishers, their opinion is informed, nuanced, and able to avoid coming off as venting at best and spiteful at worst. Because you know, people's opinions and criticisms are for the most part worth taking seriously, and when a post that was meant to be serious is presented in a way that looks like irrational venting or spiteful hatred, it winds up accidentally devaluing the actual point behind it and so making the point look dumb. Sure, in a completely logical world, tone shouldn't matter. Only the message should. But we live in a logical and emotional world, and so it is quite common and easy for people to use tone to infer how and why people believe an idea, to what extent they do believe in it, and the motive behind they've chosen to express it. Somebody who calmly tears Forces to pieces and explains where and who caused the problems will appear much more thoughtful and well-informed than somebody who goes on endless angry rants about how awful Forces is and how everybody who made it sucks, even if both have the same viewpoints on Forces and its staff. And so the former will be taken seriously whereas the latter will come off as angry stupid fanboy rants. We can use our logical side to acknowledge points others have as true, false, or somewhere in between while also pointing out and asking for clarification when tone distorts the message in a negative manner. We can express our emotions, but also review what we write to make sure the emotions are being expressed in a healthy manner. If we so desire, we can also work to improve our tone so that we are more clear about the intent and the like of what we post. I don't claim to be perfect with any of this.

This doesn't require longposting nor does it apply to stuff that's obviously joking about something that doesn't exist in real life. I'm also not just talking about folks here-- this is a commentary on what I see here and elsewhere (especially on social media) and something that I think is a small part of a general problem with people on the internet. Also, this is something people need to think about and work on when they're willing and ready. Most of the time there's no point in calling somebody specific out when they're utterly failing to present their point in a clear and respectable way-- I wouldn't even be making this post if I didn't think that there weren't at least some people in this conversation willing to at least take it in before responding.

[Phos]

Hmmm, Sonic Team can't retain their talent?  Makes me curious if this is a problem plaguing other japanese developers (Nintendo headhunting their best staff), or if it speaks to an institutional issue facing Sega.  

 

The latter wouldn't be that surprising, combining a tight budget with a series they seem to have a low institutional understanding of.  I can hardly blame them though, in some ways Sonic is kind of an odd game to have become so popular.  Just looking at all the "Was Sonic ever good" op eds you see around or the hugely misguided "How to fix Sonic" articles tells me that even a bunch of people who played it in the day never understood its more niche elements.  

[Swing]

12 hours ago, Jango said:

BTW, I was messing around about the Crash comparison, I can see where @Swing came from. Still, Crash was a remake of 3 games from the 90's. These three games were remade FROM SCRATCH in just a 1 year and a half. While Sonic Forces in 4 years of development cycle had: 3 unpolished gameplays, blandest level design in a Sonic game, questionable story and a bunch of recycled stuff. But I've said in this same forum I wouldn't talk about Forces anymore, so take it as my last ultra combo finish: Sonic Forces is bad, and Crash has all the rights to outsell it. Sonic Forces has all the rights to fail.

Wow... if this is the truth, than something did really went wrong in the production of Sonic Forces. Even more with Sonic 06. Either that Or Sega really just do not care about their flagship series an their fans anymore. 

[UpCDownCLeftCRightC]

9 hours ago, Phos said:

The latter wouldn't be that surprising, combining a tight budget with a series they seem to have a low institutional understanding of.  I can hardly blame them though, in some ways Sonic is kind of an odd game to have become so popular.  Just looking at all the "Was Sonic ever good" op eds you see around or the hugely misguided "How to fix Sonic" articles tells me that even a bunch of people who played it in the day never understood its more niche elements.  

Sonic's main entries in the 90s always had a consistent gameplay philosophy. In many interviews, Sonic Team at the time understood clearly what all of that was and how to communicate it to players. Yuji Naka in particular commented on the unique playstyle and how it is different from other platformers, using the same language many longtime fans do. This was not lost on many in the 90s. If you talk to just about anyone who played Sonic in the 90s, they'll tell you "it wasn't a straight line racing game" or "you didn't have to go treasure hunting" (these are actual quotes from people I know who left the franchise a very long time ago) 

Starting with the adventure games, each successive game retained less of a connection to the original gameplay essence, the biggest offender undoubtedly being Sonic Adventure 2 in terms of a radical jump in philosophy and also in creating an entirely new generation of fans that believed that SA2 is ideal. This split and then further splits down the line are why these questions periodically pop up. There are numerous different playstyles for Modern Sonic since 1998, none of which are great, and so the gaming world is forced to ask "was Sonic ever good" and wonder how to "fix" Sonic.

It happened, its perfectly understandable why it happened, and all the events leading to it happening. But the state of Sonic now, the brand confusion...that should have stopped years ago. 

 

[Slashy]

On 12/17/2017 at 7:11 PM, UpCDownCLeftCRightC said:

Oh good lord, I almost just vomited thinking about that. Because in the past it is exactly what I think would happen.

The saving grace in this situation, ironically, is that SEGA and Sonic Team have f*cked up so many times now in a staggering variety of ways, that they have about exhausted the possibilities in areas where they could screw the next move up. I don't think even they could fathom asking DIMPS to do what Whitehead and Thomley did with Mania for hypothetical sequel. As silly as they are, I can't see it. They do not believe that vastly different Sonic 4 and Sonic Mania are projects handled without respect to the developer.

The only way the proper people are not rewarded here is by politics and jealousy because some pride has been smacked up. That I do see as a remaining possibility and its why I wait. Any other company I can imagine, would have already began serious discussions about how to upgrade the parties responsible for success.  

If they want to make 2D Sonic games like Rush or Sonic 4 Episode II I would be fine with that. I would rather see DIMPS on 3D Sonic at this point.

[Slashy]

2 hours ago, UpCDownCLeftCRightC said:

Starting with the adventure games, each successive game retained less of a connection to the original gameplay essence, the biggest offender undoubtedly being Sonic Adventure 2 in terms of a radical jump in philosophy and also in creating an entirely new generation of fans that believed that SA2 is ideal. This split and then further splits down the line are why these questions periodically pop up. There are numerous different playstyles for Modern Sonic since 1998, none of which are great, and so the gaming world is forced to ask "was Sonic ever good" and wonder how to "fix" Sonic.

It happened, its perfectly understandable why it happened, and all the events leading to it happening. But the state of Sonic now, the brand confusion...that should have stopped years ago. 

 

I enjoyed treasure hunting in Adventure 1 and would have liked it in 2 if the radar was fixed and the hints more forgiving. There was a joy in speeding around a level trying to find things, so much so that Super Mario Odyssey shares several elements with the treasure hunting stages.

Also it seems like you are belittling the numerous amount of fans that like Adventure 2, as though their love for Sonic is worse than yours and it was a problem that SEGA made a game that got them into Sonic in the first place. As much as Adventure 2 was a marked departure from the series it was enough of a change to keep the series highly relevant without just trying to be like Mario.

 

[UpCDownCLeftCRightC]

7 hours ago, Slashy said:

I enjoyed treasure hunting in Adventure 1 and would have liked it in 2 if the radar was fixed and the hints more forgiving. There was a joy in speeding around a level trying to find things, so much so that Super Mario Odyssey shares several elements with the treasure hunting stages.

Also it seems like you are belittling the numerous amount of fans that like Adventure 2, as though their love for Sonic is worse than yours and it was a problem that SEGA made a game that got them into Sonic in the first place. As much as Adventure 2 was a marked departure from the series it was enough of a change to keep the series highly relevant without just trying to be like Mario.

 

I didn't say a single word about "Adventure 2 fans". I have no qualms with anyone getting happiness out of a video game regardless of its quality and my own preferences. 

I and many others have issues with aspects of the game itself. It's not personal, so don't take it that way. That does not mean that we cannot have a conversation about design and stylistic elements. They are subject to criticism just like in any other medium.

 

Also, you have no basis on which to claim adventure 2 was enough to keep Sonic relevant compared to Mario because he has been anything but that, even in 2002 for sonic adventure 2 battle for the gamecube and the immediate sequels. That actually was the exact beginning of the series downfall in terms of critical reception and sales. 

 

Edit: hmm, I realize that I did somewhat leave room open for interpretation for that with my comment about creating a new generation of fans. My point with that is that SEGA then (and numerous times since) created a fracture in its fan base with wildly diverging conceptions of Sonic and SA2 was the first major one we've seen. Understand though that that says zero about the fans and their preference but 100 about the developers for being reckless about the IP. Without even talking about "quality", they continually pit fans against each other by doing that. They've done it again since and don't seem to have learned any lessons in that regard....though they have at least acknowledged it.

[Jar Jar Analysis 1138]

12 hours ago, UpCDownCLeftCRightC said:

That actually was the exact beginning of the series downfall in terms of critical reception and sales. 

Why would you say that? The Saturn Era and CD had extremely little of Sonic, which I'd say was the beginning of the end. Sonic 1 and 2 were top sellers among the Genesis but CD, Sonic 3 and S&K? Not to mention how the Saturn era didn't have any mainline Sonic games to compete with the PS1 and N64. That really hurt him.

Critical reception started falling but not as it is today but the sales dropped pretty big when looking at Sonic 2 compared to Sonic 3 upon release. This isn't even including how people were just getting tired of the over-saturation with him.