Do you think fans (and non-fans) of Sonic are too hard on Sonic games?

[Shiny Gems]

I mean, sure, there are a lot of Sonic games that have not been too great, if at all, mostly the 3D ones. Still, most 3D Sonic games that are not so great are mostly average, including, but not limited to Sonic Forces, Sonic Lost World and Sonic Heroes. The only really bad games I can think of are the likes of Sonic 06 and Sonic Boom: Rise of Lyric. With that said, I do believe that Sonic Team and Sega have made some questionable decisions with the Sonic brand, but I can't help but feel that Sonic Team, the games and Sega, in some, yet a lot of aspects, still get a lot of unnecessary hate from people as there might be exaggeration in that hate, or at least dislike. In terms of exaggeration, it can be slight or even great to unrealistic degrees.

I understand that some people like some of those here don't want "mid" Sonic games, even though being "mid" is not exactly a bad thing. Still, it seems that in the past, Sonic fans, and by extension, non-Sonic fans (those who still play the games, but might listen to others like the critics, and maybe the critics themselves) seem to get on the cases of Sonic Team, Sega, or another developer involved in making a Sonic game for, sometimes, even the slightest mistake or bad thing. Plus, while the bashing of such people may be warranted; with criticism even being needed for them to improve the games with; sometimes, the criticism and even bashing is not necessary or even overblown. Now there might not be a way to measure people's opinions in any way, but I do think it can be easy to see the overblown parts of the criticism from fans and non-fans.

In fact, too many people listen to others without forming their own opinion or even without playing a game like a Sonic game; I think that such people based their opinions off not only others, but the overblown criticisms of the game, when those listening to others about games could have a different opinion altogether and might even like the game despite what others have said. Still, opinions vary from person to person, so there can be a lot of conflict about the quality of Sonic games. I do think, however, that how a game is made can be determined in plenty of ways, just viewed differently by different people. What might be something that is true about how any aspect of a Sonic game is made might not be seen that way by an individual. Still, I think Sonic games do get a lot of unnecessary hate or even criticism. The same could be said for any game, but I think with that, people can be, or even are hard on Sonic games to unrealistic levels, whether in terms of complete games or their aspects.

What about you all? What is your opinion on this? Do you think fans and non-fans of Sonic might be too hard on Sonic games, or have been in the past?

[castell-neath]

Hmm...its a tricky one to answer. I think as a franchise develops, and the fanbase a) widens and b) ages people have different expecatations of what the franchise "should be".

Quality is key though,and some sonic games, no matter what you think of "type" / style / tone (looking at you warehog!!) , have been pretty shoddy; from broken games (06) to short and dull (Forces) to wft (Rise of Lyric). For that,us fans have been legitimatley hard on them.

Of course, some will always moan as the franchise will produce something that is vastly different to what they are used to / liked when they "entered" the franchise. I admit, i was not keen on SA for a long time as it was so different from the 2d side scroller, but i grew to like it. Look at star wars and star trek...some long time fans love Discovery and Andor, others hate it. What they both agree on though is that both series look superb as they are well produced. Sonic is just the same. We dont mind new ideas in games, but just make sure they work!!! Lol

Edited November 18, 2023 by castell-neath

[Knight Terror]

21 minutes ago, castell-neath said:

to short and dull (Frontiers)

Eh, agree to disagree

Either way it seems a big problem for sonic team (in my eyes) is incredibly shoddy corporate. i.e. having to fight for me development time in frontiers.

[castell-neath]

2 minutes ago, Knight Terror said:

Eh, agree to disagree

Either way it seems a big problem for sonic team (in my eyes) is incredibly shoddy corporate. i.e. having to fight for me development time in frontiers.

Meant forces. Doh! Typo corrected

[Shiny Gems]

4 minutes ago, castell-neath said:

Meant forces. Doh! Typo corrected

Yeah, we all make our mistakes sometimes, but I understand. No biggie.

But anyway, I think there is one thing that doesn't have to count as fans being hard on, and that is Sega themselves, despite me mentioning them in the initial post, but I meant in only some aspects.

For the most part, though, I will say that Sega has not only done questionable things with the franchise, but they just care about the money, to the point that the games are rushed, even if they do have some great merit to them. I don't think you can call it fans being too hard in that case. I mean, a lot of corporations love money, and Sega included, it can corrupt business to the point of them doing the wrong thing, just like with Sega and Sonic 06 back then, and Forces, too.

Speaking of which, I do agree on what you said on both those games AND Rise of Lyric, the very latter which did great damage despite being a spinoff. My personal score for Forces back then was a 70-75 back then when it was released, but I do not think it has aged well enough for me to keep that score. It was definitely rushed, and I remember reading that the game had to be redone a number of times during development (something like that?), so that did not help.

But yeah, Sega aside, I think Sonic Team, and maybe other Sonic game developers (like Dimps, but not including the ones behind Rise of Lyric, of course) get too much negative criticism to the point of people being unnecessarily hard on them.

Still, I must admit that, as you said, this may be a tricky question to answer, no lie.

[castell-neath]

Slightly off the topic,but I'm sure I read (maybe it was on this forum?) that Forces was rushed to make up for the financial failiure of Boom...if that is the case, then yes,this shows that sega is a company that 100% puts profit over product - short term gain / quick buck over something that can last and make huge bucks consistenly like gta 5 / online has (i mean thats seen 3 different console eras!!!l)

 

[Knight Terror]

1 hour ago, Thankful Gems said:

It was definitely rushed, and I remember reading that the game had to be redone a number of times during development (something like that?), so that did not help.

From what I've heard that game was developed in under a year, and most of that time was devoted to making the hedgehog engine 2.

[castell-neath]

Under a year??!! Nuts when you consider they were also looking to get the avatar mechanics included in it

[Shiny Gems]

19 minutes ago, Knight Terror said:

From what I've heard that game was developed in under a year, and most of that time was devoted to making the hedgehog engine 2.

It was four years total, something like that; two for making the Hedgehog engine, so I guess it would have been two years actually making the game itself.

[Johnster4]

4 hours ago, Thankful Gems said:

I understand that some people like some of those here don't want "mid" Sonic games, even though being "mid" is not exactly a bad thing.

If a fan of a series like Sonic, or a dev like Sonic Team, who are capable of delivering bangers like the Genesis games, Nights, Burning Rangers, Sonic Adventure 1/2, Phantasy Star Online/Universe, why should they settle for mid or mediocre games when had good games in the past? I would argue that settling for mediocrity content in general isn't a good idea, I've seen it first hand with games like Destiny where the content is mediocre which has lead to bad problems with Destiny and Bungie right now, and with Xbox during the Xbox one where they only released mediocrity during that generation which is why PlayStation is still the dominant console platform.

 

2 hours ago, Thankful Gems said:

But anyway, I think there is one thing that doesn't have to count as fans being hard on, and that is Sega themselves, despite me mentioning them in the initial post, but I meant in only some aspects.

For the most part, though, I will say that Sega has not only done questionable things with the franchise, but they just care about the money, to the point that the games are rushed, even if they do have some great merit to them. I don't think you can call it fans being too hard in that case.

I agree to a certain extent, but from what I have seen most of the time when people bring this up is that it's sounds as an argument to make Sonic Team immune from criticism when a game flops. RGG studios consistency release high quality games despite having yearly releases in Japan.

Another example would be Halo and how 343 have been nothing but consistent failures while other dev's at Microsoft have no problems such as Forza and Gears of war during the Xbox one era.

Going back to the Bungie everyone blamed Activision when they were the publisher but when Bungie went independent, the issues were apparent with how their game philosophy shifted to content as fast as possible at the cost of quality.

 

53 minutes ago, Knight Terror said:

From what I've heard that game was developed in under a year, and most of that time was devoted to making the hedgehog engine 2.

Lets say the game came out in get delayed for 1 year 2018, however it had the same issues as it did with the original release, do we keep blaming SEGA until we get a good game, or would we admit Leadership at Sonic Team i.e Iizuka, Kishimoto, and Nakamura) are an issue when it comes to design philosophy during the 2010's.

Edited November 18, 2023 by Johnster4
.

[Xandur]

I feel like the constant criticism is part of the reason why a lot of modern Sonic games are so consistently mediocre. As the series has evolved, Sonic Team has jumped from gimmick to gimmick in an attempt to settle on a style of gameplay that works for the series, e.g. the boost formula in Colors and Forces, the hack-and-slash gameplay of Boom and Unleashed (mostly), the motion controls of Black Knight and Secret Rings, and most recently, the "open-zone" gameplay in Frontiers. Whenever these gimmicks get heavy criticism, Sonic Team sees it as incentive to experiment with the next gimmick, then the next, then the next. That's why the Sonic series has been so over the place for around two decades. It's like a self-fulfilling prophecy, in a manner of speaking - Sonic Team tries something bold with a new game > that bold thing is condemned by the fanbase > Sonic Team moves on to the next bold thing. They'll keep digging themselves into a deeper hole with each desperate jump they make. No game studio is capable of being a perfect jack-of-all-trades that can nail so many differing styles of gameplay in every game they make. It's just not realistic.
Point being - I think the continued pressure that the community puts on Sonic Team is a big contributing factor to the relatively poor current state of the series. So, yes, it would certainly help if the community (as well as those outside of it) were to ease up a bit. Fortunately, Frontiers seems to have been pretty well-received, so hopefully we'll keep moving uphill from here.

[CalmCha0s]

17 hours ago, Xandur said:

Sonic Team tries something bold with a new game > that bold thing is condemned by the fanbase > Sonic Team moves on to the next bold thing. They'll keep digging themselves into a deeper hole with each desperate jump they make. No game studio is capable of being a perfect jack-of-all-trades that can nail so many differing styles of gameplay in every game they make. It's just not realistic.

Unpopular opinion, but the vast variety each Sonic game offers is a reason why I love the series so much. Even though it may not be the best game, I at least feel like I'm paying for something completely new (usually) and not just a remake/quick sequel like other series have been doing for awhile. I agree this causes issues of never having a perfect game for everyone, since there are so many different playstyles to factor in. But this allows the developers to get more creative! I feel like we get so many more interesting stories and characters because the variety is allowed. Games are just meant to be enjoyed; no game is ever going to be perfect for everyone. Period. Look for the good in a game - because there's always something good - glass half full. :) (Even 06, we got Silver!) 

 

18 hours ago, Xandur said:

Point being - I think the continued pressure that the community puts on Sonic Team is a big contributing factor to the relatively poor current state of the series. So, yes, it would certainly help if the community (as well as those outside of it) were to ease up a bit. Fortunately, Frontiers seems to have been pretty well-received, so hopefully we'll keep moving uphill from here.

I feel that sometimes people get almost too invested with criticism and need to take a step back and realize it's just for fun and there will always be anther game if the newest one isn't for you. Liking or disliking a game isn't the problem, it's the intensity of the opinion that is making Sonic jump in all of these directions, imo. But like I said, I'm fine with it since I like variety and always look forward to what's next. That doesn't mean sequels aren't welcome though! They just need to add something more each time, and I'm confident that Sonic will continue to do that. If there's a sequel like Frontiers (which is likely) building on the good and adding some new ideas will make it different enough to enjoy, too.

[Shiny Gems]

19 hours ago, Xandur said:

I feel like the constant criticism is part of the reason why a lot of modern Sonic games are so consistently mediocre. As the series has evolved, Sonic Team has jumped from gimmick to gimmick in an attempt to settle on a style of gameplay that works for the series, e.g. the boost formula in Colors and Forces, the hack-and-slash gameplay of Boom and Unleashed (mostly), the motion controls of Black Knight and Secret Rings, and most recently, the "open-zone" gameplay in Frontiers. Whenever these gimmicks get heavy criticism, Sonic Team sees it as incentive to experiment with the next gimmick, then the next, then the next. That's why the Sonic series has been so over the place for around two decades. It's like a self-fulfilling prophecy, in a manner of speaking - Sonic Team tries something bold with a new game > that bold thing is condemned by the fanbase > Sonic Team moves on to the next bold thing. They'll keep digging themselves into a deeper hole with each desperate jump they make. No game studio is capable of being a perfect jack-of-all-trades that can nail so many differing styles of gameplay in every game they make. It's just not realistic.
Point being - I think the continued pressure that the community puts on Sonic Team is a big contributing factor to the relatively poor current state of the series. So, yes, it would certainly help if the community (as well as those outside of it) were to ease up a bit. Fortunately, Frontiers seems to have been pretty well-received, so hopefully we'll keep moving uphill from here.

I can understand that. I do think Sonic Team has a part in this themselves, as they decided to do some things without the player's consent. (Who asked for guns in Shadow the Hedgehog, anyway?) Still, I do think fans also have a part in this as well, as you said. In fact, they are rather discouraging Sonic Team with their efforts rather than being supportive, and as The Adventures of Sonic the Hedgehog Sonic would say; "That's no good!". It is not good because such discouragement prevents Sonic Team to get a clear picture as to what to do next or what to keep for Sonic games. As fans of Sonic, we should be more supportive when we can, not complain or bash Sonic Team and other developers most of the time simply because we did not like something they did. Not only is constantly complaining mentally unhealthy, but little good; if any; can come from not using constructive criticism and pointing Sonic Team in the right direction. Sonic Team and other developers can't get a clear idea what to do next if there are no positives from fans, let alone no constructive criticism.

[batson]

No I don't think people are being too harsh on Sonic games. If anything us hardcore fans tend to be too lenient, to the point where we we praise any new game that isn't downright bad as a triumph. I think we actually have incredibly low standards when we so often go "well the game is playable and kinda fun, good job Sonic Team!". Imagine if Mario fans had the same standards. Instead they except the Mario games to be legitimatly good, not "good enough".

[Scritch the Cat]

Unfortunately, it's kind of hard to discern  what "too hard" is, but I think the reason for that is so much of it is coming from non-fans.  Not always avowed haters like the Game Grumps and that smug little asswipe at IGN who said Sonic was never good and everyone who disagreed just wanted to have sex with Big the Cat, but often enough, people who don't have a stake in this series, specifically, continuing or improving.  I think because several generations of gamers fantasized about how awesome it would be to play video games as a job, they came to hold professional game critics in high regard, but the truth is that professional game critics are there to play and review video games in general, not any specific favorites.  Sure, they'll have favorites, and it helps if audiences know what they are, but inevitably they'll review a lot of stuff they're indifferent to.  For example, I personally am indifferent to Fire Emblem.  If I had to play and review a Fire Emblem game for a job, then I'd certainly rather I have fun than not have fun doing it, and I'd be honest about its quality, but if it was bad then I wouldn't have any foresight about whether my pillory of it would set the brand back, because I could not care less if no more Fire Emblem stuff was made.  Actually scratch that; I might as well be brutally honest here: I maintain that nothing Fire Emblem does unto itself is anything to get bothered about but the fact that so many Smash Bros spots keep getting clogged up by Fire Emblem characters instead of anyone I like means that I would actively celebrate the Fire Emblem series dying.  I still wouldn't "bully" it for that reason alone but I wouldn't feel any remorse if a negative review I did happened to help kill it.

It is prudent to remember such factors as these when looking at criticisms of a Sonic game, because while things like technical flubs and obvious pandering to trends are easy for people to agree on regardless of personal preference, not all criticisms come from the same place.  The first time I remember being really torn on how much vitriol was too much was with Shadow the Hedgehog, because by that time people were used to critics having negative takes on the series that often amounted to little more than "This isn't what I like."  It was impossible for pretty much anyone to excuse the game, but personal perspective made the difference between seeing that as the tragic moment a once-great series jumped the shark, and seeing that as the hilarious moment a series that had always been a blatant attempt to pander to cool trends got its inevitable, even deserved, comeuppance.

I can actually grudgingly concede that the latter perspective has some merit.  While I maintain that the series could and should have avoided that sort of utterly cringe wipeout, it's easy to believe that the series would have some sort of growing pains as tastes changed.  But while I can acknowledge the Sonic series went in too deep to pander to trends popular in the 1990s, the difference between me, as well as other Sonic fans, and people who are indifferent-to-hostile to Sonic, is that we know and care that pandering to trends isn't all the Sonic series ever did.  While quite a few obvious (and actually good) copyright-friendly clones of Sonic are being made now, for a long time that wasn't the case; for a long time, even at its very worst (except when Rise of Lyric became its very worst), it must be said that there was no other series that played quite like Sonic The Hedgehog, and there is merit in how Sonic The Hedgehog games play, even if it's not for everyone.  Trends change but not everything is a trend.  The sort of lingo used by extreme sports athletes in the 1980s and 1990s might be seen as embarrassingly uncool now, but the utilization of vertigo and disorientation that gave extreme sports their innate appeal still has the same effect because it taps into something psychological and eternal.  The sensation of going fast, while it can certainly wear out its welcome, will always carry a sense of excitement at least initially, because it's foreign to most people's usual experiences.

There are undoubtedly a lot of fans who white-knight for the Sonic series in reaction to critics, but it's also not really deniable that there are a lot of critics who have given the Sonic series the sort of criticism that is not really constructive.  The diatribes against Sonic's cast of characters are a classic example.  You can make a valid case against a particular character if that character has brought in unwelcome gameplay diversions, but if you're annoyed by the simple fact that this series stars anthropomorphic animals, then there's probably nothing this series can or should do to please you.  If you want a tiger to change his stripes, then you probably just plain don't like tigers.  Criticisms of how this series builds challenges around its premise of speed follow a similar spectrum from valid to irrelevant.  You can make a case that making most of a Sonic game's challenge be about obstacles, sometimes unforeseeable ones, undermines the very speed that's supposed to appeal to people about the series, and many people have, but if you just plain don't value going fast as something that's worth keeping a series around for its own sake, then it's time people who actually do value it to stop taking your opinion seriously.  If you're so opposed to it that you actually advocate for its discontinuation, then fans are justified in fighting you.

Having said all that, while Sonic is worth defending, and as such, many Sonic games are worth defending, I'm not sure Sonic Team is worth defending anymore.  It's clear they're no longer at their low point when they thought it was acceptable to rush out blatantly unfinished games if they thought they could get away with it.  Takeshi Iizuka and (especially) Morio Kishimoto have more than demonstrated that they want to please the fans; their hearts are in the right place...but many have by now concluded their heads aren't.  Their conception of what is a good Sonic game isn't that of many fans, and that's not a diss but it's kind of inevitable when what is nominally the same company as existed when fans liked it more has rotated out so many of its old power players that made it what it was back then.  Tell them what you want and they might listen, but often it seems like they didn't understand why you wanted it, and also often even when they do give you what you want, they fail to give you something that you took so for granted that you didn't even see a need to ask for it to come back.  Case in point, Sonic's speed in Frontiers persisting into his jumps.  You'd think if anything was an absolute no-brainer in a platformer about going fast, it would be the ability to go fast while you're jumping, but apparently not, and so while they did address the feedback and patched this back into a free update, why feel compelled to trust them to make good Sonic games when you even need to ask them for that?  These people want Sonic games to be good, certainly, but when they have scant regard for making them good in the way Sonic games used to be good, then what is that really worth?  We've already seen that attitude debunked by history.  At worst, it has led to games that aren't good by almost any metric, but even at its best, it has led to games that are good in a way so mutually exclusive to what older fans want that it diluted any objective sense of what a good Sonic game was supposed to be anymore.  Why do you expect the same attitude to produce any better results in the future?

[Rabbitearsblog]

This is a tricky question.  On the one hand, yeah Sonic fans are right to be very concerned about the franchise and most of the games in the franchise could be much better if there was more time spent with making the games, rather than constantly rushing out the games.  But on the other hand, there are some Sonic fans who are never satisfied with the games and it doesn't matter what game comes out; they are going to be disappointed with the games because it's not the games that they want.  Because of this massive division between the Sonic fans, Sonic Team is having a hard time trying to figure out what to do with the franchise, because the fans have so many different opinions about where the franchise should go and there are still going to be people who are unhappy, no matter what direction the franchise is going in.  I think the best thing that Sonic Team could do is to just improve on the gameplay that they have already established and once they improved the gameplay style already set up, then they could move on to a different gameplay style.  So, if Sonic Team wants to satisfy the Sonic fans, then they just need to focus more on putting out good quality games and not be too concern about pleasing the entire fanbase, because that's nearly impossible to accomplish.

Edited December 5, 2023 by Rabbitearsblog

[OldmanSonic]

I have a feeling Sonic Team are under constant tight time constraints. I hope the new "Super game" Initiative will give them time to breathe.

[Sonic Blast]

I think that it for sure is criticized more heavily than say..... other games, but does deserve it in most cases, just not to the extent that it gets. I mean a lot of the complaints are just dumb, like too much water(albeit other games get dumb criticisms too like Ratchet & Clank Tools of Destruction getting docked for "too much variety").

[Ravenfreak]

I think critics are way too harsh and biased on Sonic games. Most of the time critics like to bring up Sonic '06 in their reviews, despite the game being 17 years old at this point. Sonic games get way too much hate online, and it annoys me. Sonic fans usually aren't too harsh, definitely not as harsh as critics IMO.

[Rabbitearsblog]

1 hour ago, Ravenfreak said:

I think critics are way too harsh and biased on Sonic games. Most of the time critics like to bring up Sonic '06 in their reviews, despite the game being 17 years old at this point. Sonic games get way too much hate online, and it annoys me. Sonic fans usually aren't too harsh, definitely not as harsh as critics IMO.

Yeah, I agree that the critics are way harsher towards Sonic than the fans are.  At least the fans are much more forgiving than the critics.

[Guergy]

Do remember how the critics were harsher towards Sonic? They even went as far as to say "Sonic was never good to begin with". 

[Shiny Gems]

35 minutes ago, Guergy said:

Do remember how the critics were harsher towards Sonic? They even went as far as to say "Sonic was never good to begin with". 

I'd say they did not know what they were doing, or saying even, and if they actually liked the classics and the good Sonic games, they decided to drop it and say things like that to get views or please viewers, which to me, is dumb and dishonest.

[Wraith]

No. I think the kid's got it too easy.

As someone who's watched a lot of series they love fizzle out or sell their souls after a mediocre game or two, I'd say the opposite is true. Sonic has coasted off of good-will for far longer than what's usually feasible for a game series. This cutthroat industry has been easier on him at most, and even the people who are hard on him only care so much because they want to see him win.

This goodwill isn't entirely unearned, don't get me wrong. The reach the classics had was worldshattering, and while I'd argue the Adventure games didn't live up to the hype, they were at least good enough to solidify the Sonic fanbase as we know it today. The fanbase that would carry them through years of tumultuous releases through sheer passion.

But almost 20 years of fuck-around time is unheard of for games, and that's what it was. There were good games between Sonic Adventure 2 and now, but counting spin-offs there's an absurd amount of Sonic stuff that just did not really make the impact they intended it too. A lot of stuff that's at best polarizing. Plenty of junk that's considered disappointing by the majority.

And yet, we never got to the point where the series just gets it's legs blown off like what happened with, say, Saints Row a few months back. Shit was looking pretty dire there for a second in the Boom era but other than that we just sort of took the fact that they'll try again for granted. Maybe it's because Sega keeps their budgets in line and sets reasonable goals for sales. Maybe Sonic is "good enough" often enough that he keeps his head above water. I personally think a lot of it has to do with a loyal fanbase of kids and devotees and enough lapsed gamers on the edge of things who still remember the good times they had with their 90s-era game of choice just enough to give the new stuff a chance. Clueless as the guys at IGN are, I think that even they wanted the best for the little fucker.

In the modern day I'd argue that even the public conversation around Sonic has turned on it's head. There's still a lot of indifference and even negativity toward frontiers, but everyone's bored of twisting the knife. The sheer exhaustion with Sonic being disappointing gave Frontiers a big buff just for showing any signs of life in it's eyes. This makes me think that this "narrative" around Sonic is actually a benefit that Sega could easily exploit to greater sales if they just released more than one solid win a decade.

 

Edited December 16, 2023 by Wraith

[Knight Terror]

36 minutes ago, Wraith said:

No. I think the kid's got it too easy.

As someone who's watched a lot of series they love fizzle out or sell their souls after a mediocre game or two, I'd say the opposite is true. Sonic has coasted off of good-will for far longer than what's usually feasible for a game series. This cutthroat industry has been easier on him at most, and even the people who are hard on him only care so much because they want to see him win.

This goodwill isn't entirely unearned, don't get me wrong. The reach the classics had was worldshattering, and while I'd argue the Adventure games didn't live up to the hype, they were at least good enough to solidify the Sonic fanbase as we know it today. The fanbase that would carry them through years of tumultuous releases through sheer passion.

But almost 20 years of fuck-around time is unheard of for games, and that's what it was. There were good games between Sonic Adventure 2 and now, but counting spin-offs there's an absurd amount of Sonic stuff that just did not really make the impact they intended it too. A lot of stuff that's at best polarizing. Plenty of junk that's considered disappointing by the majority.

And yet, we never got to the point where the series just gets it's legs blown off like what happened with, say, Saints Row a few months back. Shit was looking pretty dire there for a second in the Boom era but other than that we just sort of took the fact that they'll try again for granted. Maybe it's because Sega keeps their budgets in line and sets reasonable goals for sales. Maybe Sonic is "good enough" often enough that he keeps his head above water. I personally think a lot of it has to do with a loyal fanbase of kids and devotees and enough lapsed gamers on the edge of things who still remember the good times they had with their 90s-era game of choice just enough to give the new stuff a chance. Clueless as the guys at IGN are, I think that even they wanted the best for the little fucker.

In the modern day I'd argue that even the public conversation around Sonic has turned on it's head. There's still a lot of indifference and even negativity toward frontiers, but everyone's bored of twisting the knife. The sheer exhaustion with Sonic being disappointing gave Frontiers a big buff just for showing any signs of life in it's eyes. This makes me think that this "narrative" around Sonic is actually a benefit that Sega could easily exploit to greater sales if they just released more than one solid win a decade.

 

This is like that one conspiracy that the first sonic movie design was there to generate controversy, while ignoring that cats 2019 exists... bull

On the other hand: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IwTXCwqurNQ

Edited December 16, 2023 by Knight Terror
Grammar

[Shiny Gems]

1 hour ago, Wraith said:

No. I think the kid's got it too easy.

As someone who's watched a lot of series they love fizzle out or sell their souls after a mediocre game or two, I'd say the opposite is true. Sonic has coasted off of good-will for far longer than what's usually feasible for a game series. This cutthroat industry has been easier on him at most, and even the people who are hard on him only care so much because they want to see him win.

This goodwill isn't entirely unearned, don't get me wrong. The reach the classics had was worldshattering, and while I'd argue the Adventure games didn't live up to the hype, they were at least good enough to solidify the Sonic fanbase as we know it today. The fanbase that would carry them through years of tumultuous releases through sheer passion.

But almost 20 years of fuck-around time is unheard of for games, and that's what it was. There were good games between Sonic Adventure 2 and now, but counting spin-offs there's an absurd amount of Sonic stuff that just did not really make the impact they intended it too. A lot of stuff that's at best polarizing. Plenty of junk that's considered disappointing by the majority.

And yet, we never got to the point where the series just gets it's legs blown off like what happened with, say, Saints Row a few months back. Shit was looking pretty dire there for a second in the Boom era but other than that we just sort of took the fact that they'll try again for granted. Maybe it's because Sega keeps their budgets in line and sets reasonable goals for sales. Maybe Sonic is "good enough" often enough that he keeps his head above water. I personally think a lot of it has to do with a loyal fanbase of kids and devotees and enough lapsed gamers on the edge of things who still remember the good times they had with their 90s-era game of choice just enough to give the new stuff a chance. Clueless as the guys at IGN are, I think that even they wanted the best for the little fucker.

In the modern day I'd argue that even the public conversation around Sonic has turned on it's head. There's still a lot of indifference and even negativity toward frontiers, but everyone's bored of twisting the knife. The sheer exhaustion with Sonic being disappointing gave Frontiers a big buff just for showing any signs of life in it's eyes. This makes me think that this "narrative" around Sonic is actually a benefit that Sega could easily exploit to greater sales if they just released more than one solid win a decade.

 

I wonder where you got the part about the negativity and indifference about Sonic Frontiers from, as that game had a lot of positivity towards it, last time I checked. While this may just be an guess, I think you have isolated your own views on Sonic Frontiers from the positive views on Sonic Frontiers from the positive people, as in you are not caring enough to acknowledge the positive things towards that game, as if they did not matter in your eyes to the point that you may only acknowledge the negatives. I am pretty sure there was no exhaustion to be had that detracted from Sonic Frontiers' reception.

That said, I think your opinions about the more modern Sonic games is too much in line with those who have been more negative about the series (reviewers and critics included) for you to see that they can be too hard on Sonic. Thing is, they have been hard on Sonic and they have been. I have seen your opinions on recent Sonic games, and since they seem not too different from those outside the fanbase (especially back then when hating on Sonic was more of a thing after Sonic 06), I am not sure if you are able to see what can be the case otherwise. I mean, you did not like Sonic Frontiers when others were more positive about it, (not to invalidate your opinions, though, but still...) so that gives me a better idea on what you may be thinking.

That said, I do not think the reviewers and critics, and others outside the fanbase have been easy on Sonic as you said. In fact, I would say they have been much harder on the series than you may be implying.