Slipping away...

[Phos]

Adventure is based off of a 3D Sonic game for the Saturn that was never completed (Sonic World is running on this engine).

He had much more involment in Adventure 1 than Adventure 2. Iizuka's skills lie more with making stuff look cool than making them fun to play.

[SuperStingray]

He had much more involment in Adventure 1 than Adventure 2. Iizuka's skills lie more with making stuff look cool than making them fun to play.

That explains a lot.

[lounge]

He was, however, seriously involved with the creation of the first Sonic Adventure, and he also ran Sonic Team while that game was being developed.

How do you know he was seriously involved though? He didn't do any design, programming, didn't do any story material or anything like that.

Sonic Adventure 2 took on a different direction because it was made in the west. Different market, different atmosphere, smaller team.

[Tornado]

How do you know he was seriously involved though? He didn't do any design, programming, didn't do any story material or anything like that.

He went with Iizuka on their little rendezvous in South America when they were thinking of game location, character design and basic storyboard ideas. He had direct approval of pretty much everything that went into the final game. He also, you know, ran the team that developed the game (and did so at a time that Sonic Team did a single game at a time).

Regardless of how much Iizuka thought up to put into the game (and other than initial concept and some basic gameplay ideas, nothing has ever been specifically attributed to him. Most of the things in the final game are usually established to be group ideas), it didn't go in until Naka gave his approval (interviews Iizuka has done after the fact confirm this). In that way alone, Naka had more control over the game's final make up than anyone else on the team.

Furthermore, Sonic Adventure was originally a Saturn game that was restarted on the Dreamcast fairly early on in development (much like Shenmue) when Stolar blew up the Saturn in America. They took what they had done and incorporated it into Sonic Jam; then started working on Sonic Adventure from there. The game was also originally based on the NiGHTS engine. It is therefore possible to think that Naka threatening to quit Sega in 1997 was possibly because Sonic Team was working on the at-the-time-also-using-the-NiGHTS-engine Sonic Adventure. A possibility that more than suggests an active role in the development, at least initially.

Immediately after Adventure first came out, Sonic Team split in two, and Yuji Naka essentially left the Sonic series and worked on the stuff Sonic Team Japan was putting out at the time (PSO and Chu-Chu Rocket, for example). Come Sonic Adventure 2, Iizuka had free reign to do pretty much whatever he wanted; and the overall game design changed drastically at that point because of it. Said series redesign is also attributed to being the reason Oshima packed it up and split for Artoon.

Sonic Adventure 2 took on a different direction because it was made in the west. Different market, different atmosphere, smaller team.

That doesn't wash. Sonic 2 was not particularly different then Sonic 1. Sonic Unleashed was not particularly different then Sonic Adventure 2.

Edited March 28, 2009 by Tornado

[UncleChuckTH]

To answer the question, I think I may have grown out of it a little. SA remains my favorite to date, along S3&K.

Because of the diminishing quality of Sonic games starting with SA2, I don't get quite as much out of them. I hated the Riders series - to me that was a load of bullshit, if you're going to have a Sonic racing series make Sonic run like in Sonic R, and don't make the game impossibly difficult. After the first Riders there was no getting the second. I have to admit I did enjoy ShTH but I still know how poorly made the game was. I still got some kicks out of it though. 06 and Unleashed were both games I didn't play because of the critiques I heard. I am fond of the storybook series, I loved SatSR and have heard good things about Black Knight so I will probably buy it- but in general, I'm playing other stuff now. Other stuff I missed out on while I was just playing Sonic.

I still like the franchise, but I don't like where it's been heading for the past several years. It's a real hit and miss thing for me. If some more Sonic games come out and get good reviews I'll probably go for 'em. While I'm not playing their games much anymore, I haven't lost ALL faith in SEGA, because I know they're capable of making a good game. In short, I may have moved on a bit, but I still like most of the characters and I definitely still love the concept.

[lounge]

Alright, you made a good point with naka's involvement. I just prefered iizuka's direction, because that's how I got interested in the games.

That doesn't wash. Sonic 2 was not particularly different then Sonic 1. Sonic Unleashed was not particularly different then Sonic Adventure 2.

"we see a lot of the beautiful images here in San Francisco everyday. And we wanted to apply those elements in the game.

As for the other stages, since we came to the US, we've gone on various trips to places in the US like Yosemite Park. Since most of our research [in level design] was predominately done in San Francisco, and that fact that we're developing SA2 in the US, we wanted to make SA2 have more of an American flavor... you'll see a lot of the settings inspired by America."

"I thought Sonic was very suitable for the US market, so I wanted to develop the character and the games in the US. I think it’s easier to understand the market if you live there."

Being developed in the west did have an impact on the direction. Sonic 2 was by a different team and was made in a different location in the US, so it depends on how inspired the designers are. In this case, Iizuka's team was more inspired when they moved.

Also, how do you find sonic unleashed similar to sonic adventure 2?

[Tornado]

Also, how do you find sonic unleashed similar to sonic adventure 2?

The basic game feel is pretty much the same thing. The gameplay is pretty similar too. This is particularly odd considering the game really didn't involve Iizuka, but then again Secret Rings and Black Knight had very Iizuka-like styles as well (though that is mostly in music design, admittedly). Only STH '06 was notably different in that regard, a fact that's all to commonly ignored for the quite valid reason that the game is completely awful.

Edited March 28, 2009 by Tornado

[SuperStingray]

The basic game feel is pretty much the same thing. The gameplay is pretty similar too.

It didn't feel very similar at all to me. Sonic Unleashed didn't have any shooting levels, and very little "treasure hunting" and Sonic Adventure 2 didn't have brawling. The level design itself had a very different aura. And even if your just comparing the Sonic Action stages in SA2 to the Daytime Stages in Unleashed, they are still very different; Unleashed is much more straightforward and fast paced while SA2 has more individual level features and basic platforming.

Edited March 28, 2009 by SuperStingray

[Tornado]

Being developed in the west did have an impact on the direction. Sonic 2 was by a different team and was made in a different location in the US, so it depends on how inspired the designers are. In this case, Iizuka's team was more inspired when they moved.

That quote talks about the games visual style and setting and how the level's were designed to fit the two. That doesn't discuss anything related to how the game being made in America changed the way it played so drastically.

And even if your just comparing the Sonic Action stages in SA2 to the Daytime Stages in Unleashed, they are still very different; Unleashed is much more straightforward and fast paced while SA2 has more individual level features and basic platforming.

The core design (MOAR SPEED) and levels designed around it (everything funneled down a single narrow path) started with Adventure 2, and were refined (made more annoying?) as time went on. If you want to be specific, I would say that Heroes and Unleashed are much closer than Unleashed and Adventure 2; because Heroes had pretty much everything non-speed-centric removed and the level design was much more streamlined. However, Heroes pretty obviously draws a lot of design ideas from the previous game anyways.

Phos can probably explain this better than I can, as he was the one who made me think about it anyways.

Edited March 28, 2009 by Tornado

[Phos]

Both games seem to be based more on an idea of how the game will look in action vs. how it will actually play, though they are pretty different.

The levels seem to work along the same lines, though SA2 has more level specific set pieces giving the levels more diversity. They are similar in that they're mostly linear (apart from when the boost pads turn you) and any division in route isn't for the sake of choice, there's obviously a good route and a bad route, and apart from avoiding bottomless pits, the only challenge comes from taking the good route. The divergence also ends shortly, rejoining the main paths moments later.

So basically, they're both different from the originals in (mostly) the same ways: they both have the homing attack, an overabundance of boost pads and pitfalls, shortcuts rather than alternate routes (even Adventure 1 has a few truly alternate routes, Sky Deck has these all over the place). They have a number of differences: their controls are almost completely different, with Unleashed coming much closer to pinball dynamics than Adventure 2 (though never actually using it), large differences in their respective homing attacks, and the boost, though the boost would be mostly useless in Adventure 2, the only places without boost pads aren't set up to allow the boost.

[batson]

Speaking of nothing, i just found this Sonic AMV with a song whose lyrics actually seems very appropriate for the subject;

[Jetronic]

Not for me, if I play a bad Sonic game, instead of whining and complaining, I just go an play something else for the time being =P

[BlueFlare]

I've finally come to that point I only prefer the older, classic Sonic games. I could say I'm slipping away from the next gen Sonic sh*t, totally.

I don't know why but I really can't stand the newer games, let's say from SA1 to SatBK. Sonic Unleashed was an exception, partially. It felt more finished, the gameplay didn't feel that broken. The daytime stages were a good treat, to me at least. Werehog wasn't that bad in terms of gameplay, but the idea sucked, though. Although, Sonic Unleashed almost did what I always wanted from a 3D Sonic game, and I talk about the daytime stages now. They were what Sonic should be all about - running fast as f*ck and not caring about anything! Even the controls were pretty satisfying.

Sonic Adventure 1 & 2 are probably the most over-rated Sonic games. Seriously. I've finally finished both of them, and I couldn't say those were even medicore in my book. Yeah, I know, they are kind of aged already, but still glitchy and buggy as F*CK! I don't see much good things in those.

I think being a fan of the series isn't all about liking everything that comes out from the series (like some people do here, not meaning to offend anyone, though). It's also disliking it. If you say I'm an asshole, only because I don't like the games majority of you like, it's okay, but I think you're the real assholes. So, I'm slipping away, not from Sonic, but the newer games.

Edited April 2, 2009 by PeTeRpAn

[CreamyBagel]

Sonic Adventure 1 & 2 are probably the most over-rated Sonic games. Seriously. I've finally finished both of them, and I couldn't say those were even medicore in my book. Yeah, I know, they are kind of aged already, but still glitchy and buggy as F*CK! I don't see much good things in those.

There will always be a divide here. Personally I prefer the 3D games because 3D games are what I was brought up on, like a lot of SA1/2 fans were. Some were introduced to Sonic through these games so that's why they consider them their favourite. I don't think I could ever slip away from Sonic, I love all the games even if some are better than others.

For me SA was a landmark game and SA2 was the best 3D sonic game to be released. Quite a lot of people put this down to the inclusion of Shadow and the storyline, so trying to make another Sonic game which matched the standards of the SA series would be difficult. Sonic Team will always have to live up to expectations of fans who love the new games and those who love the old games.

Edited April 2, 2009 by CreamyBagel

[Gin93]

I like sonic no matter what.

[ovarloard]

I like sonic no matter what.

That's nice and everything, and I'm not putting down your opinion, but it'd be nice if you explained why you like it... or what you like about Sonic.

[BlueFlare]

Sonic's too popular nowadays. Even though a lot of people dislike it, it's still too popular or at least Sega is trying too much to make it a winner. Anime destroys everything.

Edited April 4, 2009 by PeTeRpAn

[Totally]

Wow!I sill love Sonic , not the way it was, but I do like the last games and I think litle by little he will bring his glory back!Look at Unleashed!If it was only Daytime stages the would had better score!

[BlueFlare]

Wow!I sill love Sonic , not the way it was, but I do like the last games and I think litle by little he will bring his glory back!Look at Unleashed!If it was only Daytime stages the would had better score!

It would also have been a lot shorter game. They should have put there tons of more daytime stages. If you wanted to change my mind about newer Sonic games with your statement, you try for nothing. You think SatBK was a success? Sonic Unleashed alone won't save anything because it isn't much better than decent. SatBK was a bad joke. I even started to hate Sonic Adventures more and more.

Edited April 4, 2009 by PeTeRpAn

[famicommander]

I actually liked Black Knight a lot more than Unleashed, and I thought Unleashed was a good game to begin with. I love the Rush games, and Chronicles was good fun. The Rivals and Riders games could be better, but they were still fun games. Hell, even Mario and Sonic was one of the better games in its genre.

My faith in the series hit a low point with Sonic '06. My faith has been steadily increasing since.

[Gin93]

That's nice and everything, and I'm not putting down your opinion, but it'd be nice if you explained why you like it... or what you like about Sonic.

Well i the morden games i've played arent as bad what everyone said, and really im just very optimistic

[CreamyBagel]

Every game franchise is bound to have a bad game every now and again. I'm kind of sick of hearing people moan about how different the games are becoming, Sonic having a sword, Shadow having a gun. The older games were a lot of fun but if that's how the stages were set out every game and your only goal was to reach the end of the stage don't you think it would get just a little bit old? I honestly think it's good the creators are trying new things, it provides a variety of choices for the players. Some people might find typical 'Reach the goal' levels dull but enjoy the inclusion of choice in a game such as ShtH or the RPG aspect of chronicles. That way SEGA cater for a wider audience.

[SuperStingray]

Every game franchise is bound to have a bad game every now and again. I'm kind of sick of hearing people moan about how different the games are becoming, Sonic having a sword, Shadow having a gun. The older games were a lot of fun but if that's how the stages were set out every game and your only goal was to reach the end of the stage don't you think it would get just a little bit old? I honestly think it's good the creators are trying new things, it provides a variety of choices for the players. Some people might find typical 'Reach the goal' levels dull but enjoy the inclusion of choice in a game such as ShtH or the RPG aspect of chronicles. That way SEGA cater for a wider audience.

The older games were much more than simply getting to the end; there was a lot of vertical exploration involved. I agree that something that's done for a long time can get old, but the formula the old games had was never really given a chance to age.

[BlueFlare]

The older games were much more than simply getting to the end; there was a lot of vertical exploration involved. I agree that something that's done for a long time can get old, but the formula the old games had was never really given a chance to age.

This is very true. For example, the 2D Castlevanias have followed the same formula, but I haven't recognize any marks of it getting old. They've all been very good games. I don't think it's good to compare Castlevania to Sonic, though.

[Crystal Kingfisher]

Sonic Adventure 1 & 2 are probably the most over-rated Sonic games. Seriously. I've finally finished both of them, and I couldn't say those were even medicore in my book. Yeah, I know, they are kind of aged already, but still glitchy and buggy as F*CK! I don't see much good things in those.

WHAT????? They're not glitchy! If you want to see a glitchy Sonic game, play Sonic Next-Gen. Besides, SA2 is a godly masterpiece.