Why is Sonic considered a bad Franchise?

[Balding Spider]

Console wise Sonic is considered a bad franchise because for the longest time Sonic team tried to reimagine the franchise in many different ways. For a time It just wasn't about a blue hedgehog stoping an evil fat man from destroying nature and imprisoning his friends anymore. It was about a blue hedgehog fighting randomly manifesting deities, or dealing with doppelgangers who'd blame him for the destruction of the future and rescuing a princess that would make Peach say "Jesus lady, really?"

Sonic? BAD FRANCHISE?? huh? Nupe. It ain't even like that. It just the fact that

Okay which mod do I have to speak to in order to have this meme banned?

[Scar]

Sonic is a bad franchise, because it is convenenient for it to be a bad franchise.

Guess somebody has to be the punching bag.

The Sonic franchise has only had 2 truely awful main series titles; Sonic 06, and Shadow. The rest are decent or spinoffs.

[Dr. Crusher]

I suppose this would be a convenient time to mention that Haters Gonna Hate is one of the very few memes that I have absolutely no tolerance for, which is pretty low when coming from an otherwise frequent meme-inhaler like myself.

But you do have to admit that the series isn't exactly flawless. You don't just get bad reviews for no reason.

[Gaming Misfit]

Sonic isn't considered a bad franchise. Some people are just crowd followers who wont try anything new. They immediately think "Oh, Sonic is a kiddy game series...I can't play that..." without giving it a try. Instead they play CoD because that's considered "cool" and "manly". The REAL immature thing in this situation though is when people don't give something a try and just stick to what the crowd follows. Not to mention there are more stupid kids who play CoD than there are Sonic.

Sonic? BAD FRANCHISE?? huh? Nupe. It ain't even like that. It just the fact that

Now with all that outta THA way..

Sonic is considered a kids game. (l:3)

HD Gamers already don't respect kids games.

HD Gamers also think ALL HD Games kick ass, and anything below an OK sucks.

Simple as that.

And Sonic Battle was WAY above meh... My favorite HandHeld game of all time actually. What made you say that??

Okay, who down repped him for saying that? Grow up guys. He didn't say anything to deserve that.

[the blu blur]

I'll sum it up really quickly for ya.

These games and Shadow the Hedgehog before it, helped it giving the Sonic series the stigma it has today. These games are the reason that many hardcore gamers still feel that Sonic = Bad game, or unpolished. Its unfortunate, but its something that Sega will have to undo with with a steady stream of good games. Even if Shadow was the only bad game ever released, and Sonic 06 and Unleashed never happened, It would've made the series better off and more similar to a series like Bomberman, which has only one odd misstep similar to Shadow the Hedgehog.

I do agree with the OP's point though. The series' skeletons are just too blown out of proportion, and when it does do something good its rarely recognized to such a degree as, say, Mario, and is sometimes forgotten almost entirely post game release.

Edited July 11, 2011 by the blu blur

[ThatGuyJay]

I think it's because of how everyone sees the old Genesis games so highly(not saying they weren't deserving) and the last couple games couldn't match up to that status. Also, most of the games considered bad, has a gimmick that changes the gameplay by a lot, and people aren't use to change. Some of the gimmicks could've been executed much better (Werehog, Knuckles' Treasure Hunting etc.) while some them were just bad (Big's climbing, The Sword even though I kinda liked it) Plus with fanbase with standards that reach the old classic games, it's no wonder the franchise is considered bad.

Edited July 11, 2011 by ThatGuy

[HyperGogeta]

Console wise Sonic is considered a bad franchise because for the longest time Sonic team tried to reimagine the franchise in many different ways. For a time It just wasn't about a blue hedgehog stoping an evil fat man from destroying nature and imprisoning his friends anymore. It was about a blue hedgehog fighting randomly manifesting deities, or dealing with doppelgangers who'd blame him for the destruction of the future and rescuing a princess that would make Peach say "Jesus lady, really?"

Okay which mod do I have to speak to in order to have this meme banned?

[Dr Jackstraw]

gee i dont know

the period of declining 3d games probably didn't help sonic's rep

those games included

stupid gimmicks

increasing obnoxious cast of characters

said characters getting radically different and annoying shitty gamestyles

melodramatic GRIMDARK storylines that are just awful

emohogs with GUNS.

I think i pretty much summed it up.

>this will get negrepped because somebody will be butthurt enough to negrep it

[Gaming Misfit]

I dun get it.

It totally relates to the topic, so why you mad?

Oh, and GamingMisfit, save your breath.

They don't listen to you

[Treacher]

Sonic isn't considered a bad franchise. Some people are just crowd followers who wont try anything new. They immediately think "Oh, Sonic is a kiddy game series...I can't play that..." without giving it a try. Instead they play CoD because that's considered "cool" and "manly". The REAL immature thing in this situation though is when people don't give something a try and just stick to what the crowd follows. Not to mention there are more stupid kids who play CoD than there are Sonic.

Okay, who down repped him for saying that? Grow up guys. He didn't say anything to deserve that.

[DavidTL]

To the person citing "hey why doesn't Mario get the same complaints"

Mario was first introduced in a little known game called Donkey Kong. Where Mario was forced to jump and climb his way to the top in order to save his girlfriend from the clutches of an oversized ape. Though there were two sequels to this game, neither of them featured a playable Mario. The next time the character was controllable was in the game Mario Bros., a game which had a completely different objective than Donkey Kong. Yes, there was walking and jumping, but you couldn't call it the same game. Two years later, Super Mario Bros. was unleashed on the Nintendo Entertainment System, and once again it was a completely different game. All successful in their own right, and all different games. At this point, Mario didn't have a standardized playstyle.

Even though the main sequels to Super Mario Bros. were platformers through and through, the game was never exactly the same as the previous. Super Mario Bros. 2 in Japan (AKA "The Lost Levels") was nothing more than a glorified expansion pack that also tried to be as difficult as possible. The Super Mario Bros. 2 in the west was a platformer, but performed completely differently than the first. And when the third game came out and was the same across the globe, yes, you could say its core was the same as the first. But so much was added to the game that you couldn't exactly call it "just a sequel." Level maps, insane power ups, the ability to hold on to them, the numerous mini-games and side missions scattered about...this was the original amped up to eleven and pumped up with steroids. The jump from 3 to Super Mario World wasn't that big, however, and for the first time in a decade a sequel to Mario was actually...well, a standard sort of sequel. Yet it still felt fresh with the addition of Yoshi, and of course had the benefit of being in 16-bits, and looked better than ever.

It was the Super Nintendo that also was the breeding ground for the Mario spin-off. Mario Kart, Super Mario RPG, and Yoshi's Island were all their own deals, and even the puzzle games of the NES era that had Mario just helped cement the character as being adaptable to any situation. And Super Mario 64 was yet another leap, and while it was a platformer, not many people say "oh that was just Super Mario 3 but in 3D." It was still very clearly Mario, but it had its own style and feel that made it something special. I think that's why people were disappointed with Sunshine, because it didn't have that same sort of leap. And that's why people loved Galaxy, because it was its own leap. It contained the essence of 64, but like the jump from Super Mario Bros. 1 to 3, it added so much. Galaxy 2, then, became the 3D version of World.

Now, if you want to get in fishy territory, the New Super Mario Bros. series are not the source of new and innovative ideas. They very much fit the mold of 3/Worlds in terms of gameplay. But, I think it gets away with it because it had been over a decade since the last game of the sort staring Mario had been released. It was welcomed because it had been so long, and was still solid and fun. But if you notice, the pair of New Super Mario games have never received the same sort of critical acclaim as...say, Super Mario Galaxy.

Sonic the Hedgehog was never granted this sort of freedom. Even though the classic games were all amazing, they were not the breeding ground of deviation. The closest a main title in the series got to being different was Sonic the Hedgehog CD, which could explain why it has become such a polarizing love it/hate it sort of game. The main titles on the Mega Drive were all "Get from Point A to Point B," and while the levels were new and some extra power ups and special moves were thrown in, the evolution of the classics was more about refining a formula that already worked. There was no shake-up like there had been with the Mario titles. There was consistency.

That might be why the spinoff titles that followed were just not celebrated Sonic 3D: Flickies' Island, the Sonic Drift games, Sonic Spinball. Some did better than others, but none were as beloved as the main titles of the series. And when Sonic Adventure finally arrived, even though there were other characters on the roster that didn't play like Sonic the Hedgehog, the bulk of the gameplay was focused on Sonic, and because of that many people who reviewed it mentioned the game felt closer to the 2D games than Mario's jump from 2D to 3D. Sonic Team wanted to take the formula they had perfected and take it to the next dimension, because that's how they had gone about things beforehand. Mario didn't have the restrictions, and so people didn't feel the need to complain that Super Mario 64 was different than Super Mario World. If Sonic Adventure had been a leap in the same way, it might not have faired in the best way. But for some reason, Sonic Adventure was the last tentpole title in the Sonic series that was able to do that, and each new installment has drifted further and further away from that idea...

Now to move on to a more general "why is the Sonic series considered bad?"

Sonic was not bad in the 90's. Growing up in the early part of the decade, Sonic was everywhere. And it wasn't simply a case of "oh well it's just the kids who like it." It was a solid game franchise that could be enjoyed by all ages. Now, don't get me wrong. Some people might not like what I'm about to say, but the truth of the matter is that Sonic is a kids franchise. But just because it is a kids game doesn't mean it can't be enjoyed by a wider audience. After all, Mario is the same thing. That is a game designed for kids, but can be (and is readily) enjoyed by adults. Same thing with...say, Disney cartoons. And during the five years between Sonic & Knuckles and Sonic Adventure, people waited patiently for the next main game in the series. There were stopgap releases, but the Saturn never received the title it needed. And when Adventure finally came, it was embraced by many people. It had review scores in the upper 90's. Sonic was back in full force, and people expected great things from the new Adventure titles just like they did with the classic games. Adventure was a worthy sequel.

However, things started to go bad with Sonic Adventure 2. I know people love to group these two games together because they have the same title, but they're not the same game. Not like the original numbered games are. There was quite a shift, and people didn't know what to do with it. It just...wasn't as good as the first game. It started to not feel like a Sonic title, and the flaws became more prominent. And when it was rereleased on the Gamecube? The scores lowered, even though it was only a few months afterwards, and all they did was add more content. The first round of reviews didn't want to admit that a Sonic game by Sonic Team could be anything short of spectacular. On second glance, they could now come clean and really point out what wasn't working.

Heroes wasn't much better, doing worse once again critically. Burdened with a gimmick that just never was utilized properly, the game tried harder than Sonic Adventure 2 to be closer to the classics, but somehow failed. Thus, we were left with a mediocre game that critics weren't afraid to say was mediocre out of the gate. It is possible to like the game, yes. But it is hard to argue that it is better than either Adventure title, and extremely difficult to compare it with the classic titles. Shadow's game...it also tried to deviate from the formula, but betrayed so many core elements of the Sonic series in the process. While Mario is able to deviate, at least in his many incarnations you can still point and call it a Mario game. The only way you could prove Shadow was part of the Sonic universe was because Sonic and Eggman and the rest of the cast were running around.

2006...that was a mess, plain and simple. Most everyone agrees with it, and those that say it's actually a good game...I can not understand. Because it is inherently broken. Yes, that might be because it wasn't given the extra development time it desperately needed, but the fact of the matter is that Sega published the game. Sega released it to the masses in that state, and it's not going to change ever. That can be the lowest point of the series, and the franchise has been trying desperately to recover since. To have a game series from being the cream of the crop to the worst thing on the market is an incredible feat, but not one anyone should ever strive for. And yet Sonic was able to achieve it.

So after everything Sega had done not only with the Sonic franchise but with their many other properties and home console releases, it's easy to understand why the mass media doesn't automatically trust and embrace the game series. The only reason people still talk about it so fondly is because those early games are still incredibly solid, still amazing games. No one can deny that, and because of its importance in the history of video games, people still are drawn to the series, hoping for it to return to its glory days. Anyone who argues that the old games weren't that good, and that children's entertainment doesn't need to appeal to anyone over the age of 10 doesn't understand children's entertainment at all. Kids can tell when somethings good and something is bad. They might forgive a lot more while they're younger, but if something is made with love and care and turns out good, it can last a lifetime. That is what the Mega Drive games accomplished, and it is what Sonic Adventure should have accomplished...unfortunately, I feel that the game has retroactively been demoted in the eyes of many because of its numbered sequel, and the terrible elements that were accentuated in Heroes, Shadow, and 2006. Adventure wasn't perfect, but it was much better than what followed.

Unleashed...it tried so hard to be good, but it didn't know what to do with itself. It wasn't able to redeem the series. Sonic Colors may have broken a certain cycle, and also been the best game since Sonic Adventure, but it was just that - the best game since Sonic Adventure. After almost a decade of mediocre to terrible games, the franchise needs something more than "a pretty ok game" to get back on top. And I know people will want to throw the handheld titles in the fray, but Sonic Advance was the last game that embraced the tenant of the Mega Drive titles. Starting with Advance 2, the games tried to mimic the stylings of the 3D titles, placing all of its emphasis on speed. Yes, Sonic is meant to be a speedy character. Yes, running through a level as fast as possible can be extremely fun. But that can't be all what Sonic is. At its heart, Sonic is a platforming title. You need precision platforming. You need to jump and not always press right. The Mega Drive games were able to do that, Sonic Advance 2, 3, and especially the Rush games threw that out the window. The best parts were when Sonic had to slow down, but they were far and few between. Just like in Unleashed, the best parts were when Sonic had to actually jump up things at a methodical pace. Making Sonic run fast is a lot more fun once you've figured out the game and you can run through it with your eyes closed. It isn't as fun if I have an unlimited boost button from the first time I play level one.

Sonic the Hedgehog 4...that was a title that should have redeemed the franchise, but it failed on so many aspects as well, that I would dare call it worse than 2006. It wasn't as broken on a technical level, but it did not deliver, providing below average gameplay to gain below average scores.

I can't predict what Generations will do. I hope it exceeds all expectations, though it is quite likely it will just be another "best thing since Sonic Adventure." Which is a shame. Because it is entirely possible to create another fantastic Sonic the Hedgehog game. There are people out there who know exactly how to do it, be they veterans in the field or newcomers just getting their start in the industry. However, circumstances have prevented that next great Sonic game from being released, instead sub-par and downright awful Sonic games being the norm. I want nothing more than the Sonic franchise to be considered good again (well, in the world of video games) and until that day happens, no one should be surprised that people don't hold the series in such high regard nowadays.

[Dr. Crusher]

Hey man, thanks for depressing me.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm just going to kill myself.

Edited July 12, 2011 by Dr. Crusher

[ChikaBoing]

Epic Rant, 100% reflects my thoughts.

[thedarkknight]

Because of SEGA. They don't know how to handle Sonic. They ruined Sonic Unleashed with the Werehog BS, ruined Sonic 06 by making it a launch title.

[Delta Starfire]

So I tried playing Unleashed the other day for the first time in, like, two years. I was having fun at first, even on the night time levels (though I enjoyed them a lot less than the daytime levels). Then I hit a point where I was unable to figure out how to get past an obstacle. I tried several times, but was unable to proceed and unable to figure out a way around it. Then I began to lose interest and started wanting to play some of the much more enjoyable and far less tedious games in my library. Then I exited the game, took the disc out of my console, and piled Fallout 3 in instead.

Why is Sonic considered a bad franchise? There are probably a great number of reasons, but for me, it has a lot to do with the fact that there are so many much more enjoyable titles on the market right now. Sonic just doesn't hold my interest long enough anymore, when I could be playing a game I know I'll actually enjoy a hell of a lot more. Indeed, my time spent playing Sonic titles began to decline rapidly when I started to buy other titles on my GameCube, starting with Star Fox Assault. Once I had Twilight Princess, I don't think I ever played Sonic Adventure, Sonic Adventure 2, Sonic Heroes, or Shadow the Hedgehog ever again (except when my then girlfriend came to visit and insisted on them).

I do believe that it's the very active and supportive fandom that keeps the Sonic franchise alive right now and, ironically, it may be the fandom that keeps the games from improving, because the fans will buy these games no matter how bad they are. They'll complain about how terrible the games are, but they'll still willingly part with their money in exchange for these bad games. Until that changes, Sega's going to keep pumping out half-baked shovelware every year; after all, who cares about bad reviews if your product makes a profit?

For myself, I will no longer purchase Sonic titles until I have assurances from credible gaming review sites that it's worth the money. If Sega wants my money, they're going to have to earn it.

Edited July 12, 2011 by Eon

[ChikaBoing]

Indeed, my time spent playing Sonic titles began to decline rapidly when I started to buy other titles on my GameCube, starting with Star Fox Assault.

Starfox Assault isn't exactly a quality shift from 3D Sonic games...

[Marcello]

Assault was great. Had a fantastic multiplayer.

Edited July 12, 2011 by MarcellaF

[Delta Starfire]

Starfox Assault isn't exactly a quality shift from 3D Sonic games...

I know it's not held in high esteem by most fans of the Star Fox series, but I enjoyed it tremendously and a great deal more than contemporary Sonic titles. The point was not that Assault was an "awesome" game (though that is my opinion of it), but that I simply enjoyed it more than contemporary Sonic titles and it paved the way towards me getting more games from different franchises; like Mario Kart Double Dash, 007: Everything or Nothing, the Rogue Squadron series, and various Zelda games. It expanded my gaming tastes to the point that "Which console is Sonic going to have the most games on?" was no longer a factor in choosing my next console, whereas it had previously been the only factor in my decision making.

Assault was great. Had a fantastic multiplayer.

I loved that multiplayer. :3

Edited July 12, 2011 by Eon

[Koopalmier]

Starting from Sonic Adventure 2 (which took everything good the first game had and made it worse), Sonic games have been lacking in quality (well, Sonic Heroes isn't bad, but the gameplay isn't very intuitive and the fact ennemies had HPs made the gameplay slower. Then horrible-quality Sonic games surfaced - Shadow The Hedgehog, and Sonic The Abomination. It would've been acceptable, maybe, if these weren't made by Sonic Team. The GBA and DS games weren't of the same quality as the original 2D games, either. Then the Sonic Adventure style disappeared, and Sonic got himself an all new gameplay in Sonic Unleashed - fun at first, but after all it's just "GO FAST GO FAST DESTROY RANDOM ENNEMY CROUCH GO FAST etc". And 50% of the game wasn't what people were expecting from a Sonic game - a beat'em all. The other gameplays in Sonic Adventure & 2 were acceptable because they weren't insanely slow-paced - as in, you didn't have to stop every 10 meters to kill a bunch of ennemies.

Sonic Colors is a step in the right direction (fast-paced platforming) but it's still not at the same quality as the "classic" games.

Sonic is seen as a bad franchise because we went from Sonic 3 & Knuckles, to Sonic Adventure 2, to Sonic The Abomination. And at the same time because the gameplay is becoming slower-paced, with the fast-paced parts being kind of boring aside from the scenery.

And, finally, you have the controls. Sonic games never controlled very good in comparison to other platformers, let's be honest (it's not like controlling a character that goes at 70 mph when walking is an easy task). But Sonic Adventure 2 had a major flaw Sonic 4 also has - something stops you ? You stop. Dead. You lose ALL momentum and speed, and going back to your previous speed is slow. Actually SA2 is an even worse case than Sonic 4 because Sonic's top speed is... slow. Like, very slow.

Controls weren't very good usually, but people were used to it. But starting from SA2, it became game-breaking sometimes.

TL;DR

Sonic is seen as a bad series because games between Sonic Adventure and Sonic Colors weren't fantastical (well, Sonic Heroes isn't bad, arguably). Spin-offs not made by Sonic Team aside, Sonic WAS a bad series for a few years. Not 10 years (Unleashed was enjoyable), but between 2001 and 2008.

[ChikaBoing]

Assault was great. Had a fantastic multiplayer.

That it had, once you unlock everything. The Controls still weren't all that userfriendly tough,Ratchet and Clank did the cartonny 3rd person shooting better overall.

And still,it's funny how Starfox Assault shares many faults with 3D Sonic games:

-Has too gameplay features that people don't actually want,and is pretty low quality(On-foot missions,alt-gameplay in Sonic games)

-Has too few of what people actually want(Flying Missions,Sonic Levels)

-Low quality graphics that look last-gen alot of times(this mainly applies to Shadow and 06 tough)

-Overall too short

-Voice Acting

[Delta Starfire]

That it had, once you unlock everything. The Controls still weren't all that userfriendly tough,Ratchet and Clank did the cartonny 3rd person shooting better overall.

And still,it's funny how Starfox Assault shares many faults with 3D Sonic games:

-Has too gameplay features that people don't actually want,and is pretty low quality(On-foot missions,alt-gameplay in Sonic games)

-Has too few of what people actually want(Flying Missions,Sonic Levels)

-Low quality graphics that look last-gen alot of times(this mainly applies to Shadow and 06 tough)

-Overall too short

-Voice Acting

Edited July 12, 2011 by Eon

[ChikaBoing]

Who are these "people" you refer to? Because I enjoyed some of the missions on foot and in the Landmaster. Moreover, I found the controls considerably better than many recent Sonic games, and I'm really not sure what you mean by "last gen" graphics, considering they looked pretty standard for the GameCube.

The Gaming community in general,I wasn't referring to anyone specficly.

[???]

Because they suck at the games?

[Nerfuffle]

Identity crisis-

While Mario has pretty much remained the same thing, the Sonic franchise has split in to twenty different things that all happen to have a blue hedgehog and a bald man in it. I think its safe to say that just about every gamer has their own different idea of what went wrong and how to fix it. Everyone has a different idea of what a good Sonic game is, so no one is satisfied.

Loss of trust-

Oddly enough a big part of my interest in this franchise was in the company’s talent of making decisions that incite the most anger in people as possible.

“We know that our incredibly basic background checks of our western audiences reveal that voice actors have gained cult followings in recent years, our target age group pretty much wants the men and women who work for 4kids to die painfully, and our next game will have a troop of Navis barking in your ear throughout the entire experience, but changing the cast will reduce costs.”

Message= “We’re cheap bastards.”

“Sonic 06 will be a reboot”;

Message= We’re hypocritical, irresponsible, cheap bastards”

“We let fans give us input to improve the experience of Sonic 4”;

Message= “We are an injured lost puppy/We’re covering our asses.”

Promotion- “Cartoon hedgehog with Gun” travels faster than“Cartoon Hedgehog is pals with Cartoon cat”. The same reason “Card games on Motorcycles” is a meme and “Card games on Holo decks” is not.

Rapid Fire Releases- I'm convinced a big part of the reason why this franchise still exists in the public eye is because they flood so many games in to the market. The image of Sonic remains fresh and there for the franchise is subject to the public's criticisms. I understand that this is a popular tactic among game companies, though we are beginning to learn that audiences have the patience to wait decades for an additional installment to surface.

Edited July 13, 2011 by Vantoggle

[The Man On The Inside]

Until a 5+ year period of nothing but 80% or higher metacritic averages, the franchise will be considered bad, its fanbase nuts, and its future bleak.

Having said that, a (probably naive) part of me wants Generations to really be the "Street Fighter IV Moment", when it releases to critical and commercial fanfare, series is considered back on top, etc.