• Welcome to ZD Forums! You must create an account and log in to see and participate in the Shoutbox chat on this main index page.

Is Sega bad or just Sonic?

Sonic is good in 2D. Always has been and always will be. Sonic Mania will be better than Sonic 2017, just like Sonic & Knuckles is better than any 3D sonic game ever (so is Sonic 3).

Sonic in 3D just doesnt work. Somehow, no matter how hard they try (Sonic Adventure), no matter how many gimmicks they use (Sonic the Black Knight/Unleashed etc) or how hard they rip off other games (Sonic Lost World), Sega just cant get Sonic in 3d to work. At all.

For a while i just thought it was all Sega's fault. I just assumed they were incapable of making good 3D games, Sonic or not.

But that's not the case. Sega made Valkyria Chronicles, a masterpiece of the genre, they helped make F-Zero GX which is frikking awesome. They make the Hatsune Diva games which lead the genre... they can make great games...

So how cant they make a good Sonic game? And by good i mean actually good, not 'good by Sonic standards' (Colours) or half good (Generations) but actually good, like Mario good.

What is it with Sonic? Or is it still Sega? Are they so clueless about their own mascot in 3D that theyre incapable of making a good Sonic game?

What do you all think, is Sega bad or is Sonic just a lost cause?
 

BoxTar

i got bored and posted something
Joined
Apr 13, 2009
Location
Pacific Northwest
Sonic is good in 2D. Always has been and always will be.
Well that depends on who you are. I personally enjoyed the 3D game Sonic Generations over any of the original Sonic games. Dunno if that's a minority of opinion or not, but the original Sonics are painful for me to play through. For a platformer the momentum is weird, his speed is annoying and the design of the games are just frustrating. But again, that's personal opinion.

So how cant they make a good Sonic game? And by good i mean actually good, not 'good by Sonic standards' (Colours) or half good (Generations) but actually good, like Mario good.
Again, I personally think that Generations is a very solid, 100% good game through and through. Shoddy bosses here and there but overall great, and most people I talk to agree about this. I think the half good game you're thinking of is Unleashed. That was more polarizing than Generations, tbh.

I think you're bringing a lot of personal bias into this (and so am I lol, its hard not to with this series). Sonic was successful at first not because it was the best game ever, but because it was marketed well. It was the "Mario Competitor". It sold the console with BLAST PROCESSING and the like. That sort of marketing shunned a lot of Nintendo loyalists, and therein lies the bias against the Blue Hedgehog.

But as time went on, the games finally got it together. Then they fell apart. Then they got it together. Then they fell apart. The one thing Sonic has never had that Mario has always had is simple: consistency and holding up over time. The first 2-D sonics seem good because people have uber nostalgia for them, but they're not actually that great. I played them not long ago, without nostalgia, and they're floaty, weird, and awkward. I had Sonic 1 growing up and even I have to admit by level 4 it becomes an absolutely dreadful experience.

I know I'm rambling but the thing that makes Sonic good isn't as simple as what makes Mario good. What made Sonic good was the character's personality (ATTITUDE), the character design, the music, the colorful level design, the SPEEEEEED, that sort of thing. Level design and complexity non-withstanding, people didn't care about that at the time. That's what people got from the Adventure series and those games are ****ing ABYSMAL. And a lot of people are finally starting to admit that (and yet they still want Adventure 3 for some god-forsaken reason).

So, the main point: Sega isn't a bad developer. They made Bayonetta for God's sake! if anything its more of a Sonic Team thing (its got its own division in the company, after all). If any blame should be thrown, its at them since they have main control over the series. While I'm not huge on Sega's games, its just ignorant to say that the company as a whole is to blame for Sonic's wavering quality.
 

Mido

Version 1
Joined
Apr 6, 2011
Location
The Turnabout
While I completely disagree about the overall retrospective of 3D Sonic, your point is well-taken, esspecially given what we have seen over the past ten years regarding SEGA's icon. It's a tough question to wager since while Sonic has lacked success, I am not aware of many SEGA entities that received large acclaim since Sonic's major downfall in 2006. This isn't to say SEGA has not released good games during this span of time. Going back to the blame game, I'm not entirely keen on assigning blame on one or the other, but more of where the focus is going. SEGA obviously would like their flagship franchise to do well, but given its shortcomings over the years, the focus perhaps should fly in other directions. Continue supporting successful series like Valkyria Chronicles and perhaps bring some old favorites back into the mix such as Power Stone and Fur Fighters. Ultimately, I suppose Sonic could harbor some of the blame, but there seems to be more dimensions to the situation.
 

DekuNut

I play my drum for you
Joined
Jan 29, 2011
Location
Tangent Universe
Personally I enjoy most of the 3D Sonic games. Adventure, Heroes, hell even Shadow. I know thats a minority opinion, but its mine.
I think that the problem isnt that Sonic is bad, or that Sega is bad, but that Sega doesnt care enough about Sonic. I find that, despite a few missteps, Sonic was mostly good until Boom. Lost World was passable. Generations was a fun nostalgia booster. Unleashed was a step in the right direction after '06.
However, Sega doesnt care about the series as much. They only made him as an answer to Mario during the console wars, and has faded into the background slowly since the 90s. Listen to some of the outsourced developers working on Sonic games, and it just seems like Sega doesnt care enough to put in the effort, despite many seeing this series as the face of the company.
 

Dio

~ It's me, Dio!~
Joined
Jul 6, 2011
Location
England
Gender
Absolute unit
I think Sonic Team just have trouble making good games. Period. Not SEGA itself.

There are hardly any good sonic games. The best one for me is Shadow The Hedgehog followed by Generations which is way too short an experience.
 

Lozjam

A Cool, Cool Mountain
Joined
May 24, 2015
Sonic Mania is looking to be a great game. Just so you know.


Also, Sonic Colors is still a legitimately good game, and not by "sonic standards". Its just a great game, with fun gameplay, and a really good set of characters.
 

Ventus

Mad haters lmao
Joined
May 26, 2010
Location
Akkala
Gender
Hylian Champion
Sega sux, Sonic does not. Also there is nothing wrong with SA1 and 2. The problem is the BOOST hold X to win "gameplay". That isn't what sonic is about. You're only allowed to go fast in sonic if you knkw the level layout, having the game basically be on raild isn't sonic.
 
Joined
Feb 7, 2014
Location
Ohio
Gender
tree
The Sonic series went through an awkward teenage phase around the PS2/GC/XB era, and that's really just about it. Other than Sonic 06, I don't think any of the main games were bad.

Not to mention Sonic 2017 might be the game I'm most exited for this year.
 

Jamie

Till the roof comes off, till the lights go out...
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Gender
trans-pan-demi-ethno-christian-math-autis-genderfluid-cheesecake
Aside from 2D sonic games, what do they really do aside from Atlus? SMT, Persona, Etrian Odyssey are all big games but does SEGA have direct influence on Atlus or do they just let them go? NBA2K had to be salvaged from SEGA before they ruined sports games.

Seriously though, what else do they do? I don't think they are good developers at all.

@BoxTar no, they published Bayonetta. Meaning they didn't have anything, or very little to do with its creation.
 

CrimsonCavalier

Fuzzy Pickles
Joined
Mar 27, 2015
Location
United States
Gender
XY
I never really liked Sonic, even in 2D. It just never really captured me. They're not bad games, they're just not particularly good.

But I think the downfall of Sonic as a franchise and SEGA as a console manufacturer really hurt the entire company overall. I can't think of the last SEGA-developed game I played, never mind enjoyed. They're just not very good at making games.
 

Kylo Ken

I will finish what Spyro started
Joined
Aug 10, 2011
Location
Ohio
Aside from 2D sonic games, what do they really do aside from Atlus? SMT, Persona, Etrian Odyssey are all big games but does SEGA have direct influence on Atlus or do they just let them go? NBA2K had to be salvaged from SEGA before they ruined sports games.

Seriously though, what else do they do? I don't think they are good developers at all.

@BoxTar no, they published Bayonetta. Meaning they didn't have anything, or very little to do with its creation.
They made Project Diva, which makes cash-money in Japan.
 

BoxTar

i got bored and posted something
Joined
Apr 13, 2009
Location
Pacific Northwest
I can't think of the last SEGA-developed game I played, never mind enjoyed. They're just not very good at making games.
Nah, that's completely subjective. Trust me, I'm not fan of SEGA either, but its completely brazen to say that the games are objectively bad. I know plenty of people that hold not just Sonic games, but games like Jet Set Radio, Phantasy Star, Space Channel 5, and Super Monkey Ball super close to their hearts (yes, those are all SEGA produced games, I checked). Its all just a matter of taste. You could tell me all the titles I listed suck, but people still love them to bits. And for that reason, SEGA still stands on its own as a solid developer.
 

Jamie

Till the roof comes off, till the lights go out...
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Gender
trans-pan-demi-ethno-christian-math-autis-genderfluid-cheesecake
Nah, that's completely subjective. Trust me, I'm not fan of SEGA either, but its completely brazen to say that the games are objectively bad. I know plenty of people that hold not just Sonic games, but games like Jet Set Radio, Phantasy Star, Space Channel 5, and Super Monkey Ball super close to their hearts (yes, those are all SEGA produced games, I checked). Its all just a matter of taste. You could tell me all the titles I listed suck, but people still love them to bits. And for that reason, SEGA still stands on its own as a solid developer.
Citing old ass games doesn't make them good. They are a bad company nowadays. Not sure how they are still around.
 

BoxTar

i got bored and posted something
Joined
Apr 13, 2009
Location
Pacific Northwest
Citing old ass games doesn't make them good. They are a bad company nowadays. Not sure how they are still around.
Wasn't citing modern success, was talking about the company as a whole. Whether or not they're making great games now is definitely debatable.

Also, Phantasy Star is still a thing. Most recent game was 2014.

The cultural barrier also comes into play too. SEGA seems to have a lot of games geared more towards the Japan audience that America/Europe never sees (See: The Hatsune Miku series). So while we can sit over in the west touting how much SEGA sucks, they might have a gigantic following over in Japan. Again, subjectivity comes into play.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom