Sources: Nintendo Switch 2020 line-up dominated by Mario games old and new

[sdp]

You can argue 3D World is the evolution of Galaxy 2 level design since Galaxy 2 had less open worlds than Galaxy 1 and 3D world just expanded on being restrictive. Didn't play much of either of them much but Galaxy 2 still felt like Galaxy and 3D world just felt like a nicer 3D Land, and I don't consider 3D Land a 3D Mario game.

That's why Odyssey felt so fresh, it had been a decade since the last real 3D Mario, even more if you don't consider Galaxy 2 a 3D Mario. 3D Land is a nice game but it feels like a handheld Mario game, not quite the console experience but fun. I know people say 3D World gets really good near the end but those first few levels didn't make me feel the need to play again.

[Galactus]

Originally Posted by Turo602

I can't imagine how anyone can complain about 4 big Mario games coming to Switch, a new live Mario Kart game, a bunch of crossover event celebrations, new Mario products including a massive Lego set, and other goodies like the Game and Watch and Mario Bros. 35 not being enough for Mario's Anniversary, yet being okay with Sonic Forces of all games for what was supposed to be an anniversary game.

Because Sonic hasn't been a big deal since the 90s. No one really expects much for his anniversary.

Yes, in terms of quantity Nintendo are giving us a lot. In terms of quality...well it's still pretty darn good however you can't fault people for wanting to get the treatment that lesser franchises have gotten with their collections or what Mario himself got with the original All Stars.

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

The games are remastered with new textures and better graphics, this video compares the N64/gamecube/wii versions with this one:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...ature=emb_logo

So it's not just simple ports, Nintendo generally fails to communicate these things for some reason. Fans hype their products better than the company itself.

It's a minimal effort. They've still kept the blocky polygon look and that's not a deliberate aesthetic choice

Originally Posted by Leo656

They wouldn't be "event" games if they came out constantly. Same with Zelda.

Look at Assassin's Creed. One (or two) games every single year for the longest time, and they all sell in big numbers, but that doesn't mean people actually care. Most people buy them out of habit, play them for a weekend or a few days and never finish or go back to them. Sure, they're successful, but they all bleed together in most peoples' minds and individually they make no real impact.

Meanwhile, every single Mario or Zelda game that comes out is Big News. They know what they're doin'.

I dunno for a while Nintendo really did over saturate the market with those New Super Mario Bros game. We got like four of them in the space of six years in among the Galaxy games.

I tend to think that why the 3D Land and World were slept on (the latter being on the Wii U didn't help) even though they were different they still seemed too much like the New games that it took a complete break with Odyssey to get people hooked on Mario again.

[CyberCubed]

Originally Posted by Galactus

I tend to think that why the 3D Land and World were slept on (the latter being on the Wii U didn't help) even though they were different they still seemed too much like the New games that it took a complete break with Odyssey to get people hooked on Mario again.

Mario 3D Land is one of the best selling 3DS games, remember it came out in 2011 the same year it launched only in the Fall. Mario 3D World sold well for a Wii-U game, but well, it was on Wii-U...and most people didn't have a Wii-U.

Like most of Nintendo's other Wii-U ports to Switch, I expect Mario 3D World to sell very well when it comes out in February. The additional content will even get people like me to double dip on it who already had the original since 2013

[sdp]

I like the blocky Mario 64 look, but I can always replay the N64 version in many ways, I would indeed have liked a little more effort especially when a few hackers can do so much more with the PC port of Mario 64. And yes Nintendo can do a lot more with all the money they have, they have no excuse to cut corners. But even with this lazy release they could've included Galaxy 2, it literally would've cost them next to nothing to include it.Even the packaging is disappointing, there is no manual or anything of the like, they could've at least had an instruction booklet, an anniversary badge, I don't know stickers.

Originally Posted by Galactus

Because Sonic hasn't been a big deal since the 90s. No one really expects much for his anniversary.

Sega might be a shadow of its former self and the quality of Sonic games as well depending on your views but Sonic is a sales juggernaut with kids and is as big now as he's ever been. Perhaps not as big as he was in the 90s but he's up there.

[Turo602]

Originally Posted by Galactus

Yes, in terms of quantity Nintendo are giving us a lot. In terms of quality...well it's still pretty darn good however you can't fault people for wanting to get the treatment that lesser franchises have gotten with their collections or what Mario himself got with the original All Stars.

I understand the disappointment, and I get the comparisons, but they're honestly not comparable. People have set the wrong expectations, and it's absurd for people to still be upset to the extent that I've seen given what they are charging for it. I guarantee not a single person would have been upset if they remade Super Mario 64 and sold it for 60 by itself, yet they're selling you 3 games for the price of one and it's not enough?

Not to mention, Nintendo has never really remade games outside of handheld conversions that were meant to showcase what powerhouses they were. Like Metroid: Zero Mission on the GBA, Mario 64 on DS, Ocarina of Time on 3DS, and one of the most recent examples being Luigi's Mansion, a Gamecube game remade (demade?) for the 3DS. Even when they remastered Wind Waker and Twilight Princess on the Wii U, they didn't do anything too spectacular to the visuals that they aren't doing with this collection. They couldn't even justify remaking A Link to the Past that they made an entirely brand new game out of it with A Link Between Worlds. The only remake I can think of they've done on a console is Link's Awakening, and that's a remake of a Gameboy game, which they also charged 60 dollars for. Bullsh*t, but again, Nintendo can get away with it.

Expecting Nintendo to remake Super Mario 64 is like expecting them to remake the original Super Smash Bros. or Mario Kart. It's obsolete. It's why you'll never see Rockstar Games go back and remake titles like GTA III, Vice City, and San Andreas when they could just keep focusing their efforts on new games that serve virtually the same purpose like GTA IV and GTA V. I'm sure Nintendo is hard at work on the next Mario for them to see any point in remaking, reskinning, and tweaking an old one to feel new when they could just give us Odyssey 2 or something. Especially at this time since they really have nothing to showcase with such a remake that Odyssey already didn't show us. That's why they remade Mario 64 on the DS and not the Gamecube.

[AquaParade]

This collection is a disappointment because:

A. These games should have been on the virtual console a while ago. The small upgrades are cool, but not worth the wait.

B. Nintendo hasn't shown off a lot for this Holiday season to keep hardcore gamers busy.

C. People want to see Mario 64 remade not re-sold once again.

D. Galaxy 2's exclusion feels cruel.

[Wildcat]

Originally Posted by Turo602

Sonic Forces was extremely mediocre. The problem isn't even that the game is short, it's the content. Levels end way too soon, so they're not even fun or worth replaying. So much of the game is automated and plays itself. Classic Sonic controls much worse than he did in Generations and has terrible flat level designs which misses the point of Classic Sonic. The story was extremely underwhelming for what they were trying to do and promote. The original character idea was neat, though also pretty cringe, and the gameplay was pretty terrible as platforming in 3D in that Sonic Engine is incredibly stiff feeling, and the emphasis on combat was also not a good idea as it's incredibly flawed and doesn't even feel good. Not to mention, the bosses were trash. It's not an awful Sonic game, but it's just extremely mediocre and at this point, people are really tired of boost formula Sonic as he's run his course.

I can't imagine how anyone can complain about 4 big Mario games coming to Switch, a new live Mario Kart game, a bunch of crossover event celebrations, new Mario products including a massive Lego set, and other goodies like the Game and Watch and Mario Bros. 35 not being enough for Mario's Anniversary, yet being okay with Sonic Forces of all games for what was supposed to be an anniversary game.

Sonic Forces is proof that Sega has given up on Sonic. First mainline Sonic game to sell at a budget price and was made incredibly easy for kids and has a character creator for all the 7 year olds who want to place themselves in Sonic's world and "fist bump" him.

I was not complaining about all the Mario offerings. Just the All Stars compilation. Oh and I said the Game and Watch was too expensive. (Classic/Mini retailed for only $10 more)

I said I’m glad about 3D World Plus because I never played it the first time around and the Live Mario Kart does look pretty cool. Id like to see other games use that format.

I do not think Sonic Forces was meant to be an Anniversary game. It was announced at an anniversary event but was released in 2017. But ya, I thought Forces was fine. Not amazing but fine. It is too short, quite easy in later stages and Ill agree has a lot of boost segments.

The notion that Sega does not care about Sonic or keeps making bad games is just old. Forces does not prove anything when Mania released the same year and most people loved it.

Coincidentally this was posted today after I just linked the old one last night. https://www.sonicstadium.org/2020/09...zine-confirms/

Anyone thinking Sonic has fallen to the wayside must not follow along. Sonic is just as big as any other franchise. Not Mario status obviously but theyre easily the 2 biggest thanks to the whole 90s rivalry.

[CyberCubed]

Originally Posted by AquaParade

This collection is a disappointment because:

A. These games should have been on the virtual console a while ago. The small upgrades are cool, but not worth the wait.

B. Nintendo hasn't shown off a lot for this Holiday season to keep hardcore gamers busy.

C. People want to see Mario 64 remade not re-sold once again.

D. Galaxy 2's exclusion feels cruel.

Mario Sunshine has never been re-released. This is the first time the game is available since the 2002 Gamecube release. Considering that was 18 years ago, millions of people and kids have never played the game since it was stuck on the Gamecube for two decades.

[Galactus]

Originally Posted by Turo602

I understand the disappointment, and I get the comparisons, but they're honestly not comparable. People have set the wrong expectations, and it's absurd for people to still be upset to the extent that I've seen given what they are charging for it. I guarantee not a single person would have been upset if they remade Super Mario 64 and sold it for 60 by itself, yet they're selling you 3 games for the price of one and it's not enough?

Not to mention, Nintendo has never really remade games outside of handheld conversions that were meant to showcase what powerhouses they were. Like Metroid: Zero Mission on the GBA, Mario 64 on DS, Ocarina of Time on 3DS, and one of the most recent examples being Luigi's Mansion, a Gamecube game remade (demade?) for the 3DS. Even when they remastered Wind Waker and Twilight Princess on the Wii U, they didn't do anything too spectacular to the visuals that they aren't doing with this collection. They couldn't even justify remaking A Link to the Past that they made an entirely brand new game out of it with A Link Between Worlds. The only remake I can think of they've done on a console is Link's Awakening, and that's a remake of a Gameboy game, which they also charged 60 dollars for. Bullsh*t, but again, Nintendo can get away with it.

Expecting Nintendo to remake Super Mario 64 is like expecting them to remake the original Super Smash Bros. or Mario Kart. It's obsolete. It's why you'll never see Rockstar Games go back and remake titles like GTA III, Vice City, and San Andreas when they could just keep focusing their efforts on new games that serve virtually the same purpose like GTA IV and GTA V. I'm sure Nintendo is hard at work on the next Mario for them to see any point in remaking, reskinning, and tweaking an old one to feel new when they could just give us Odyssey 2 or something. Especially at this time since they really have nothing to showcase with such a remake that Odyssey already didn't show us. That's why they remade Mario 64 on the DS and not the Gamecube.

If they just released Super Mario 64 on its own with only the barest of changes and charged full price for it I'm certain people would be pissed and rightly so.

They remade 64 on the DS to showcase the power of that system. To showcase that their handheld could run 3D games that is all that was necessary to impress consumers but they went all out with new graphics, playable characters and mini games etc. No one was asking for that level of change with this simply that it be given better graphics and camera. They couldn't even put it in widescreen.

You're right that when they brought over Wind Waker and Twlight Princess thet didn't do much with the visuals but they didn't need to, they simply brought them up to modern standards. They made a bigger effort with the ports of Ocarina of Time so they are capable of it. Plus with Wind Waker HD and Ocarina 3D they didn't just upscale the graphics but also fixed perceived problems with gameplay vsuch as sailing the ocean and equipping iron boots so Nintendo are cognoscent of giving fans the 'definitive' experience when porting their games to new systems. If they ever released Ocarina of Time to the Switch they wouldn't just it the same treatment as 64 here. After what they did with the 3DS version they would not be seen as going backwards so people are naturally going to wonder why they'd do that with Mario.

Also Nintendo are always working on new main line Mario games. It's never stopped them from putting their all my into other Mario related games.

[Turo602]

Originally Posted by Galactus

If they just released Super Mario 64 on its own with only the barest of changes and charged full price for it I'm certain people would be pissed and rightly so.

They remade 64 on the DS to showcase the power of that system. To showcase that their handheld could run 3D games that is all that was necessary to impress consumers but they went all out with new graphics, playable characters and mini games etc. No one was asking for that level of change with this simply that it be given better graphics and camera. They couldn't even put it in widescreen.

You're right that when they brought over Wind Waker and Twlight Princess thet didn't do much with the visuals but they didn't need to, they simply brought them up to modern standards. They made a bigger effort with the ports of Ocarina of Time so they are capable of it. Plus with Wind Waker HD and Ocarina 3D they didn't just upscale the graphics but also fixed perceived problems with gameplay vsuch as sailing the ocean and equipping iron boots so Nintendo are cognoscent of giving fans the 'definitive' experience when porting their games to new systems. If they ever released Ocarina of Time to the Switch they wouldn't just it the same treatment as 64 here. After what they did with the 3DS version they would not be seen as going backwards so people are naturally going to wonder why they'd do that with Mario.

Also Nintendo are always working on new main line Mario games. It's never stopped them from putting their all my into other Mario related games.

Which is exactly why they're not releasing it at 60 dollars with bare minimum changes, yet people are still upset. It's absurd.

And that's my point exactly. Nintendo doesn't do things without reason. They don't just remake games because they know it'll make a quick buck. They do it with the purpose of exploiting their hardware. This has always been how they operate. If they're making a Mario game to take advantage of the Switch's hardware, they're not gonna achieve that by remaking an older title.

Nintendo has always been about moving forward, even when they go backwards. Which is why they tend to go backwards a lot with their handhelds because it makes their handheld look good when it's running better versions of console games. This is why we got Sunshine on Gamecube while the DS got Mario 64. It's why we got Skyward Sword on the Wii and Ocarina of Time on the 3DS.

Also, if they do bring Ocarina of Time to the Switch, which is currently rumored, and it's just the N64 version, then I could understand the backlash. They already remade the game and they could just port that version because it is widely accepted as the better of the two. What they won't do is completely remake it again for the Switch. And while Super Mario 64 was remade on DS, I'm pretty sure Nintendo would have just gotten backlash that it wasn't the original anyway.

Which is why I think what people were expecting and asking for is totally unreasonable. What was reported was that we were getting a compilation of 3 games and that's exactly what we got and for a fair price. This isn't Mario 64 as is for 60 dollars, it's 3 games. And suddenly it's a problem or a rip-off that one game wasn't entirely remade when that was never the deal? Are people really upset or do they just want Mario 64 remade? Because if that's what they really want, then they need to be willing to pay full price for it rather than complaining about its 20 dollar value in a 60 dollar compilation.

People keep drawing false comparisons and coming to false conclusions that serve to disappoint them for absolutely no reason. Crash and Spyro for example, 2 dead franchises that desperately needed the comeback they had because they couldn't do what Mario has been doing for 35 years. Moving forward and succeeding. Those trilogies, were and are so much smaller than the amount of value and content you're getting from one Mario game let alone 3, and both franchises desperately needed an enticing revival.

Whenever the next Mario game comes around, I guarentee you the conversation will no longer be about give us Mario 64 remake. It's a nice thing to dream about, but it's not needed and honestly, I'd rather have an Odyssey 2 any day. I completely understand where people are coming from and I sympathize with it because who doesn't want more? But I also feel like it's coming from an uninformed and misguided place.

Originally Posted by Wildcat

I do not think Sonic Forces was meant to be an Anniversary game. It was announced at an anniversary event but was released in 2017. But ya, I thought Forces was fine. Not amazing but fine. It is too short, quite easy in later stages and Ill agree has a lot of boost segments.

The notion that Sega does not care about Sonic or keeps making bad games is just old. Forces does not prove anything when Mania released the same year and most people loved it.

Coincidentally this was posted today after I just linked the old one last night. https://www.sonicstadium.org/2020/09...zine-confirms/

Anyone thinking Sonic has fallen to the wayside must not follow along. Sonic is just as big as any other franchise. Not Mario status obviously but theyre easily the 2 biggest thanks to the whole 90s rivalry.

Sonic Mania's popularity proves exactly why Sega is clueless. On one hand, you have the makers of Sonic Mania saying Sonic isn't all about speed, meanwhile Sonic Team thinks people just want Sonic to go fast. Ever since Colors, it became obvious they've been trying to cater towards children more with the cringy writing, simplistic stories, smaller scale, and lower budget, but never has that been more reflective on the gameplay than Sonic Forces, which they themselves stated was meant to feel more accessible. If that doesn't say they gave up on a major portion of their audience, then what will?

Sure, we got Sonic Mania, but now what? Forget about ever enjoying a 3D Sonic game again? I loved Colors, Generations, and Lost World, so much that I replayed the latter 2 to 100% them, which isn't typical for me with Sonic games, but Forces? I haven't had the urge to ever revisit that game because it was just so bland. I tried to have fun with it, I was hyped for it, but I could just tell I was no longer in the demographic to get the most out of it. If this is how Sega views the future of Sonic, then I gotta say, it's hard to be excited for what they have in store.

Sonic Mania reminded everyone why we loved Sonic The Hedgehog by highlighting what he offered the platforming genre in the 90s that made him stand out from Mario and his wannabes, but Forces quickly reminded us why Sonic became a joke.

All I could really hope for as a Sonic fan, aside from more games like Mania, is a Switch port of Lost World, and Sonic Adventure 1 and 2 remakes, so they could possibly influence the direction the series goes in moving forward because they really need to rethink that at the moment. I just really want to see everything I loved about Mania translated into a 3D game.

[Wildcat]

Originally Posted by Turo602

Sonic Mania's popularity proves exactly why Sega is clueless. On one hand, you have the makers of Sonic Mania saying Sonic isn't all about speed, meanwhile Sonic Team thinks people just want Sonic to go fast. Ever since Colors, it became obvious they've been trying to cater towards children more with the cringy writing, simplistic stories, smaller scale, and lower budget, but never has that been more reflective on the gameplay than Sonic Forces, which they themselves stated was meant to feel more accessible. If that doesn't say they gave up on a major portion of their audience, then what will?

Sure, we got Sonic Mania, but now what? Forget about ever enjoying a 3D Sonic game again? I loved Colors, Generations, and Lost World, so much that I replayed the latter 2 to 100% them, which isn't typical for me with Sonic games, but Forces? I haven't had the urge to ever revisit that game because it was just so bland. I tried to have fun with it, I was hyped for it, but I could just tell I was no longer in the demographic to get the most out of it. If this is how Sega views the future of Sonic, then I gotta say, it's hard to be excited for what they have in store.

Sonic Mania reminded everyone why we loved Sonic The Hedgehog by highlighting what he offered the platforming genre in the 90s that made him stand out from Mario and his wannabes, but Forces quickly reminded us why Sonic became a joke.

All I could really hope for as a Sonic fan, aside from more games like Mania, is a Switch port of Lost World, and Sonic Adventure 1 and 2 remakes, so they could possibly influence the direction the series goes in moving forward because they really need to rethink that at the moment. I just really want to see everything I loved about Mania translated into a 3D game.

So youre just basing this on Forces? You say you loved the previous three 3D games.

I agree the writing gets corny in recent games but except for Forces I do not see things being scaled down. I do not know what the development process was like but maybe Mania got more attention and Forces was more rushed. Just a guess.

The gameplay is still the same even if you dont like boosting. They just needed to increase the difficulty and story mode. Would have liked more options for the create-a-character but thats a separate thing.

[Leo656]

Originally Posted by Turo602

I completely understand where people are coming from and I sympathize with it because who doesn't want more? But I also feel like it's coming from an uninformed and misguided place.

Don't forget "entitled". That's a huge one.
----------------

Re: "Forces" - Eh, I'unno. I had no expectations at all and had fun with it. I definitely noticed how short and easy it was, but I also had fun going back and re-playing all the levels to find the different paths and whatnot, mostly BECAUSE it was short and easy and I knew it wasn't going to be much of an investment. I don't often do that with Sonic games because in some cases the levels are a chore to get through even once, let alone multiple times.

I'm getting older, my standards are shifting a bit. More and more, I just need stuff that I can play for either ten minutes or several hours and still feel like I made progress either way, that's not going to have me cursing at the TV or raising my blood pressure. So I'm becoming a lot more forgiving in general. "Did this game make me want to tie one of the developers to a chair and poke them with a cattle prod? No, alright, then it's fine."

I'unno. They could've aimed a little higher, maybe. But I know I'd rather replay that one a hundred times than ever play Sonic Adventure 2 or Sonic Unleashed again even once. Trying to replay SA2 last year or whenever it was, I was amazed and infuriated at just how awful it was, especially near the end. I'm amazed they were even able to keep making games in the series after THAT one. I think that's forever going to be my personal bar for Worst Sonic Game. I haven't played all of 'em, but out of all the ones I have played that one easily takes the Sh*t Sandwich.

[Turo602]

Originally Posted by Wildcat

So youre just basing this on Forces? You say you loved the previous three 3D games.

I agree the writing gets corny in recent games but except for Forces I do not see things being scaled down. I do not know what the development process was like but maybe Mania got more attention and Forces was more rushed. Just a guess.

The gameplay is still the same even if you dont like boosting. They just needed to increase the difficulty and story mode. Would have liked more options for the create-a-character but thats a separate thing.

I'm basing it on the direction the series has gone in over the last decade. As terrible as they were, Sonic 06 and Unleashed were really the last triple A Sonic games. After that, Sonic games were significantly scaled back for better and for worse.

Gone were the overly self-serious convoluted plots and abundance of characters and playstyles in favor for simple and straightforward stories and emphasis on Sonic the Hedgehog. After Unleashed, the games felt more focused, consistent, and polished. But they were also much shorter and weren't really pushing visuals the way 06 and Unleashed did, aside from Colors which looked great for a Wii game.

While the smaller scale improved the quality of the games, it also showed that Sega no longer considered Sonic a top player like they kept pretending he was. Their perception of the franchise took a shift and they started making Sonic a kid's franchise. This was evident in all the corny jokes and simplistic writing. But the gameplay was still solid and felt like it could be enjoyed by all ages, despite being more on the easier side.

Sonic Forces on the other hand went full force into the children's game category that they felt the need to streamline and automate the already rather simple gameplay so that it was even more accessible to children. It was bad enough that levels were so short, but they literally take control away from the player on numerous occasions. You're barely even playing it.

There's kid friendly and then there's straight up for kids and Sonic Forces leans heavily towards the latter with its lack of polish, laughable OC-centric story, incredibly easy difficulty, and short length. Even Sega knew it would be a rip-off to charge 60 dollars for that thing that they came out the gate at 40 dollars. There's definitely been a decline here somewhere despite how lucky they got with Sonic Mania which wasn't even made by Sonic Team. It was a game by the fans for the fans.

The boost gameplay is a whole other thing for me. It was a nice novelty at first. We've never seen Sonic move that fast in game before and that was pretty much the appeal of Sonic Unleashed in the beginning, but aside from a few levels, that gameplay started to show its cracks due to poor level design which did get better in later games. But it also heavily relied on 2D segments because all the 3D boost segments just started feeling the same. Hold boost button and see Sonic run through a track. It hardly feels like a 3D experience the way the Adventure games did and it's like Sega pretty much gave up on 3D Sonic which is why they've heavily relied on awkward 2D platforming and Classic Sonic's inclusion.

I honestly think Sega just can't develop a large quantity of good levels in that formula, maybe even ever given the numerous playstyles the Adventure games gave us. That was part of the reason they included the Werehog in Unleashed because they didn't think the game would be long enough with nothing but day time stages, which also explains the short length in the later games, which still tried relying on other gimmicks to avoid just pure boosting gameplay.

It just seems flawed to me and its "popularity" has gotten Sega complacent, but it just doesn't feel that good anymore, especially when they have Sonic slow down for a bit to attack enemies and his movement in the 3D environment just feels so stiff and awkward because he's mostly meant to just be running on a track and moving in 2D.

Which is why I found Lost World to be so refreshing. Sonic actually controlled well in 3D and they tried something different that was genuinely good. It wasn't perfect, but it felt like the first step towards a better 3D Sonic game and then Forces happened. More tired boosting that was somehow done a lot worse than before.

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't like 2 people work on the stages for Forces or something? And I think they were inexperienced with that sort of stuff too. Which really says a lot.

Originally Posted by Leo656

Don't forget "entitled". That's a huge one.
----------------

Re: "Forces" - Eh, I'unno. I had no expectations at all and had fun with it. I definitely noticed how short and easy it was, but I also had fun going back and re-playing all the levels to find the different paths and whatnot, mostly BECAUSE it was short and easy and I knew it wasn't going to be much of an investment. I don't often do that with Sonic games because in some cases the levels are a chore to get through even once, let alone multiple times.

I'm getting older, my standards are shifting a bit. More and more, I just need stuff that I can play for either ten minutes or several hours and still feel like I made progress either way, that's not going to have me cursing at the TV or raising my blood pressure. So I'm becoming a lot more forgiving in general. "Did this game make me want to tie one of the developers to a chair and poke them with a cattle prod? No, alright, then it's fine."

I'unno. They could've aimed a little higher, maybe. But I know I'd rather replay that one a hundred times than ever play Sonic Adventure 2 or Sonic Unleashed again even once. Trying to replay SA2 last year or whenever it was, I was amazed and infuriated at just how awful it was, especially near the end. I'm amazed they were even able to keep making games in the series after THAT one. I think that's forever going to be my personal bar for Worst Sonic Game. I haven't played all of 'em, but out of all the ones I have played that one easily takes the Sh*t Sandwich.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think Forces is a bad game, it's just not necessarily good either. Which is why I call it mediocre, and the timing of it couldn't have been worse with the way Sega has been constantly touting that they're prioritizing development time to ensure quality products and we were just coming off the highs of Sonic Mania too, which only reinforced why "Sonic doesn't work in 3D." It's a bad look.

Also, I know you're not talking sh*t about Sonic Adventure 2, man. You must have that game mixed up with something else or we're gonna have problems.

But nah, Sonic Adventure 2 is not nearly the worst in terms of 3D Sonic games, but I do agree that it gets pretty messy towards the end, which is true for a lot of Sonic games unfortunately. I usually look back fondly on Sonic Adventure 2 because every time I do revisit it, I usually just stick to playing some of the Sonic and Shadow levels, and I can't honestly say it ever got better than that for 3D Sonic.

The Adventure games are pretty janky, but it's a shame that they gave up on that kind of gameplay after Sonic 06, which was terrible for a lot of reasons, but all they really needed to do was refine the gameplay and make more levels like Sonic Adventure 2. The other playstyles were always unnecessary, especially when the Genesis games already did multiple characters a whole lot better.

Adventure 1 was definitely the easier game but I honestly never liked it as much as Adventure 2 because Adventure 2 just has more going for it. The Sonic levels were much better, the playstyles were reduced to only 3, and the tedious hub world was gone. Not to mention, that kick ass final boss with Live and Learn playing in the background. That sh*t has still never been topped.

[Leo656]

I played SA 1 and 2 back-to-back not all that long ago, and was pleasantly surprised by how much I still enjoyed SA1. I hadn't played 2 in ages, so I expected to have at least as much fun, but I did not.

There are some beautiful levels and good ideas in the second one, but way, way, way, WAY too many cheap and annoying deaths. Especially the spots where they throw you 80 miles in the air and you need to land perfectly on a narrow rail, and if you miss it by a pussy hair you die. Holy SH*T, way too much of that. In later games they at least had the good sense to "magnetize" you to the rail as long as you were close enough. And the final stage where you have to play through each character for a bit SEEMS like it should be fun, but again, not fun. I get that it's the end of the game but the insane amount of cheap deaths and unfair difficulty just makes it not even worth the effort to finish it. I've beaten it once, forever ago, but after the last time I played it I gave up after playing the last level for like an hour after constantly dying before even reaching the Boss. I ended up wanting to do pretty much anything else, and I'm quite certain I'm never going to play it again. WAY too much frustration involved. The nicest things I can say about it are, 1. It's very pretty, and 2. It's not as bad as "Battle Nexus". I don't know how I ever even beat this thing to begin with, other than I must have had a lot more patience 20 years ago.

Every good idea in SA2 was later executed much, much better in later games in the series. Just about anyone would be better served by playing those same levels in "Sonic Generations" instead of actually playing SA2, that's honestly how I feel about it. Sorry, can't help it. Honestly glad you had a better experience. For me, that game almost ruined a weekend and I've only got so many left.

Sonic '06 is probably much worse, now that I think about it, but I forget about that one often since I kinda don't even consider that one to be a complete and finished game. But it's definitely terrible regardless.

[Wildcat]

Turo602,

So you liked it better when the games portrayed a more grand story of sorts and involved others besides Sonic. Nothing wrong with that. I do not think Sega has abandoned that though. I think they just moved away from it because people complained it was too much and just wanted Sonic.

I agree the more recent games feel shorter overall. Again probably because they focus on Sonic. Even Mania is short. Its Genesis-length anyway. Save files make it feel shorter. Not counting the extra modes.

Have not read up on Forces development so I dont know about the stages.

If they do remaster both Adventures I hope they do more than just technical upgrades. They already did that with SADX. The original Dreamcast graphics are not as out of place as N64 but rebuilding them would be cool. Also reworking some gameplay like the emerald hunting and fishing. Plus bonus material.

[LeotheLateBloomer]

I was concerned The Origami King was going to be the only Mario game releasing this year thinking "really?" Thankfully, that isn't the case. I remember the first rumor about this saying all of Mario's games were getting remastered but I found that rumor hard to believe because why do the classics over again (All Stars 1 already did this) and there was nothing wrong with how they look or played. That was a reason why I was skeptical of this rumor besides the fact Nintendo doesn't release compilations like this. As months passed by, I believed in this rumor less and less to the point where I no longer believed this was a thing. Until they started announcing promotions for Mario like the new shoes. Even then, I was thinking they were just going to rerelease the 3D games in a package as opposed to remastering them. Low and behold the rumors were somewhat true. The anniversary compilation is real but it's not a collection of remakes nor does it include any of the 2D games vanilla or remakes. Sometimes you have to take rumors with a grain of salt, otherwise you set yourselves up for disappointment.

[Turo602]

Originally Posted by Wildcat

Turo602,

So you liked it better when the games portrayed a more grand story of sorts and involved others besides Sonic. Nothing wrong with that. I do not think Sega has abandoned that though. I think they just moved away from it because people complained it was too much and just wanted Sonic.

I agree the more recent games feel shorter overall. Again probably because they focus on Sonic. Even Mania is short. Its Genesis-length anyway. Save files make it feel shorter. Not counting the extra modes.

Have not read up on Forces development so I dont know about the stages.

If they do remaster both Adventures I hope they do more than just technical upgrades. They already did that with SADX. The original Dreamcast graphics are not as out of place as N64 but rebuilding them would be cool. Also reworking some gameplay like the emerald hunting and fishing. Plus bonus material.

Kind of but not really. What I really want, is for them to just focus on pure Sonic gameplay. They need to do away with gimmicky playstyles, but that also doesn't mean I don't want multiple playable characters.

The way the Genesis games and even Mania handled multiple playable characters was amazing because the gameplay remained consistent and all that really changed was the character's abilities. I want to see them return to that, but in 3D. Like what they did with Sonic and Shadow in Adventure 2, except I also want to play as Knuckles, but not in some treasure hunting game.

The stories themselves and game length don't really bother me so long as the game is fun and replayable, but I would definitely appreciate something more fleshed out, but in the way something like Sonic 3 and Knuckles was more fleshed out or even Sonic Unleashed. They really don't need to take Sonic as seriously as they did back with the Adventure games and Sonic 06, because Sega was still foolishly under the impression that Sonic was edgy and cool in a time when mature games started coming around. They really didn't know how to evolve Sonic with the times.

Sonic Forces had a lot of potential, but they got completely lazy and it's hard to tell whether Sega even cares anymore so long as kids still eat it up. Which is why I honestly wouldn't mind Sonic Adventure remakes. They're beloved and nostalgic enough like the Crash and Spyro games, and they would serve as the perfect starting point for rethinking the series once they iron out the issues and make tons of improvements that could prove to Sega that this format is still viable. It wouldn't be exactly what I want from Sonic, but I'll take the hit with the playstyles if it means good 3D Sonic levels again.

[Wildcat]

I find it interesting when people say they want other characters but with pure Sonic style gameplay because like you said...in Genesis era/Mania the other characters are consistent with just their individual abilities being different.

Is that great handling of multiple characters though? They all basically play like Sonic except for times the ability comes in handy. Same difference with Shadow. His stages play exactly like Sonic in SA2 and 06.

Dont get wrong. Im fine with that. I enjoy having other characters but isnt that more like reskins with a secondary function. Flying, climbing, digging etc.

I prefer the SA format where everyones gameplay reflected their ability or gimmick. Its just the actual stages were not very fun. Im sure they could make those gimmicks fun to use though if they changed what you were doing.

Like in Forces, how well the avatar stages played depended on the type of weapon you equipped. Or at least which one you liked best.

[Leo656]

Oh, GOD, until you mentioned it Turo I completely forgot to mention the horrid Knuckles levels in SA2. THAT SH*T is another reason I'm never touching that game again. Those levels are WAY too big, wretchedly designed, and the radar is useless. I'll take a "too-short" Forces style level which I can easily go back to any time any day, forever, over a godddamn 30-minute "needle-in-a-haystack" f*ck-fest. Those levels were absolute TRASH. Whatever word most aptly describes "The Complete And Total Opposite of Fun", that's what the Knuckles levels in SA2 were.

I was really committed to finishing the game at one point, so I suffered through them, but at one point in one of those space-themed Knuckles levels my wife was practically BEGGING me to play just about anything else because it was so f*cking stupid. Then of course just as I was about to rage-quit I'd accidentally find the last Emerald piece, and thus "have to" keep going. But oh, man, thanks for reminding me of yet another reason why I should never play that f*cking game again. There's NO upside to it!

I have her to thank for finally giving up on it, sincerely. I tend to get kind of "tunnel vision" and am something of a masochist, so oftentimes once I'm committed I'll stick with something to the end. But after those horrible Knuckles levels, once I kept dying on the last level she woke me up with a few choice words: "This is the dumbest game I've ever seen. You've been playing it for two days and everything after the first level looks like absolute garbage. You don't look like you've had any fun at all since then. Are you?" I had to concede, "No, I'm not, this is the least fun I've had with a game in as long as I can remember," and that was that. Dead serious, before playing "Battle Nexus" again, SA2 was easily the worst (or at least most irritating) game I can remember playing in almost 20 years. ('06 notwithstanding, but I swear I only even played that for an hour or two as I recall, because that's more than it deserved).

If those cheap death sections didn't kill it for me, those F*CKING Knuckles levels sure did. Thanks for reminding me. They weren't too bad in SA1, but oh LORD were they awful in SA2. Those are probably the worst experience I've ever had with any video game in my entire life. Nothing but irritation and frustration with no redeeming factors at all. Horrible. Anyone who can find ANY fun with THOSE f*cking levels is made of sterner stuff than I. I've had more fun with food poisoning.

[CyberCubed]

Sonic Generations is the only really good 3D Sonic.