Topic: Could you salvage Rise of Lyric?

I'm mystified that people still give a **** about Sonic. I can't help but relegate the appeal of Sonic's character to the 90s. For me, when Sega died (as a game company with integrity), so did Sonic. They've been "slutting" him out to so many different game experiments over the years... I really don't understand the draw anymore. I mildly enjoyed the couple Sonic Adventure titles on Dreamcast, but for me the whole Sonic thing topped out with Sonic 3, which was like 20 years ago.

So I guess to answer your question, and I don't mean this as a copout, but I think they just need to put Sonic to bed for a while. They just released that other Sonic reboot to Wii U last year? Sure, this version looks extra lame with the Uncharted scarf (and the muy thai tape on his limbs?), but all in all Sonic is kind of lame. He was created in an era when Bart Simpson was considered a bad influence to children, and the general populous thought you were a trouble maker if you said things like "dude" and "rad".

At the executive level, this game is not for Sonic fans. It's roughly a Sonic skin of what's already selling big with kids today. As the show is the anchor to this brand, it's hard to say what Sega is doing wrong at this point. Serving up a mediocre video game tie-in has been the route of many marketed-to-kids/parents campaigns, and that same old story tells us it's unfortunately not unprofitable.

At worst, Sonic Boom the game is just that. It's not the 'Nintendo way', but in the rest of the industry of cartoon character media, it's acceptable and done and sold.

Yes, I miss the 90's, when cartoon character video games seemingly got just a bit more respect

First, let's talk history.

Sonic is maybe one of the first gaming triumphs of a collaboration between developers and the marketing department. There had never been a game designed like Sonic 1, that sort of technology was fresh and novel. Sega of America recognized that and put a massive marketing push to create and turn Sonic into a icon for kids. Yet, they accomplished this without trampling all over the developers' vision nor attempting to alter the game design to pander to a particular audience. Sonic Boom, ironically, appears to exist as the antithesis of this process (forged in a marketing meeting and demanding the developers bend to that will at every turn.

Now about game designers. Anyone can design a game, only some have the means to actually develop one. Monopoly was designed and adapted by many separate individuals as a sort of folk game under the name The Landlord's Game. It wasn't until Milton Bradley eventually stole that concept and marketed it as Monopoly that it was a known entity. Still, MB takes credit for the development and design while those previous individuals likely never saw any credit. Despite their lot in life, those individuals were rather successful game designers, though there were likely never able to list that as an occupation. So what is a game designer? What does it mean to profess to be one?

@UGXwolf: To continue my response, I feel my concept works precisely because it demands very little jettisoning of what we known of Rise of Lyric's game design or content. Use the same levels, same mechanics, etc... Except this concept actually allows for more streamlining and refinement. As well as more relevance to the Sonic franchise, regardless of how F-ed up it is.

No need for clumsily swapping out characters. Less need to animate playable entities, less VA, etc. Sonic and Tails' movement, abilities, and skills can then be further refined and expanded as a benefit to accessibility and playability. Less play-testing, nuance, and so on. It's more visceral as a game design, rather than a confused adaption of primarily a TV entity. The point is that my idea could very well be leaner, as in easier to execute successfully without a complete overhaul of the Sonic Boom brand. It may ask more of the design document, but less of the programmers and developers.

Moreover, what I'm trying to accomplish is some semblance of cohesion between the game design, Sonic's past, and this new Sonic Boom brand. Even if the core Sonic audience is not worth appeasing, I am looking for an idea that is at once compelling and relevant, but also appropriate for crafting a quality game. The current concept as expressed so far seems to achieve none of this. It's just some sort of action/adventure in the vein of a classic 3D platformer with unappealing Sonic designs pasted over it.

Even Generations and Colors? Because those games are undeniably fantastic. Maybe the series just isn't for you?

I agree with @UGXwolf. For me Sonic Lost World was a decent, even good game because I don't have any preconceived idea of what a Sonic game should be. And it split the Sonic fanbase because it was "not Sonic enough" or "not a real Sonic" to a lot of fans who want something very specific. You usually hear the most vocal fans wanting Sonic to avoid gimmicks, extra characters and just return to its roots, i.e. the Genesis/MD games.

So I know who Sonic, Tails, Eggman are, but I judged LW for what it was, not for what it "should" be. And I feel the same will happen with Sonic Boom, and any other game where Sega wants to try something new or different.

Uhh, not trying to be a jerk, but I think these days professing to be a game designer means that you actually design games. I have a lot of great ideas bouncing around my head about what I think would make a great game, but I have never been involved with the creation of an actual game so I would not refer to myself as a game designer. I think I get where you're coming from, but claming anyone who has random ideas about how games should be better can call his/herself a "game designer" is a bit silly in comparison to those who put in the time to actually design and create games.

Interestingly, I can only appreciate Lost World as an evolution of traditional Sonic design. As a stand-alone game, I find it haphazardly designed and rather unpalatable. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think it would really stand on it's own without Sonic... (And I worry it's best feature, the soundtrack, would have been as good.)

That said, if it had been designed around an entirely different IP, maybe some of the biggest faults would have been avoidable. Who's to say?

I don't think anything could salvage this game. Not rebranding this as a different IP, not better level design, nothing. The gameplay is just plain awful and boring no matter what you do with it.

then you mean that if they changed the gameplay itself all else could be the same as it is now and the game would be saved

Well, I'm more arguing that not being a game designed by occupation doesn't mean you aren't capable of worthwhile ideas. I'm questioning where ethical and economic aspects of ideas become incompatible.

As an analogy, folk songs often don't have attributed writers because at one point writing a song was simply the act of sharing an idea. Nowadays, being a songwriter is more occupation and often actually separated from sharing and performing. In fact an official song writer may indeed be little more than a glorified editor who coalesces various ideas from several sources into the actual lyrics we hear on the radio.

To me game design is like that. It's one of the most intrinsic acts of being human. We all design games as soon as we can create fun. There is no way to weigh experience in something so intrinsic. Being hired to design a game does not make your ideas better, it means you have the necessary qualifications regarding game development.

We are all humans and ultimately game design, song lyrics, etc... It's all simply a refined expression of an idea, intended for consumption. Society dictates status, but not the ability to communicate.

EDIT: And as far as professing to be a game designer, I guess I meant those semantics are irrelevant to the creation and expression of ideas and concepts. For instance, I've had carpenters in my house, remodeling. They are experienced builders, but I still check their work and express my ideas, often leading to a better result because the act of building isn't always compatible with the act of considering, which is what ultimately results in a successful remodel.

Coming from a Sonic fans perspective I thinks this looks insanely fun! I am really enjoying Lost World. Looking forward to picking this up.

The gameplay is definitely the part that needs changing, but IDK, it's tricky business trying to make good Sonic gameplay, the fanbase is just so fragmented from all manner of different Sonic games that it's impossible to please. Do you design the gameplay around speed, platforming, or exploration? Should the storyline be dark and serious or lighthearted and comedic? You can't have it both ways on these kinds of issues.

Thank you for actually optimistic about Sonic games, its quite refreshing to see people who the don't dismiss every Sonic game after [insert game here].

Sonic = speed, traversal, and melee combat. He runs horizontally, spin dashes up and around walls and battles hand-to-hand.

Tails = hovering, exploration, and gadgets. He is slower horizontally but faster in vertical/airborne traversal. He is based around using gadgets to assist Sonic by tethering new abilities, analyzing and discovering, and immobilizing enemies with technology.

The balance and coordination between the two is what makes for the platforming aspect. Each character can only reach certain areas on their own and they combine abilities to progress cooperatively by compensating for each other's deficiencies.

As for the story and tone, classic Sonic has always struck me as a lighthearted, colorful world with a sort of slightly-dark, hip vibe. Kind of a traditional, cute Japanese kids property infused with western sensibilities and characters. That's what I would go for, I suppose.

I greatly enjoy most of the classic games, the two Adventure games, and I thought Generations was pretty good, but that only means there was one or two decent games in an insurmountable horse dung pile spanning over 10 years. I'm done with Sonic in the future, too much disappointment and too many lousy games.

Except the level design favors slow platforming, exploration, and combat over speed. Sonic can run at light speed for all it matters, the gameplay would still be slow because most of the levels are designed so that you can't progress until you defeat enemies or hit a switch. You can't just tear through the levels from start to finish, the game isn't designed to let you do that.

Balancing speed, platforming, and exploration is pretty difficult if not impossible because speed tends to detract from the others. Look at Sonic Unleashed and boost gameplay in general. Most of the levels in that style tend to be linear corridors and are less interactive. You don't see as much platforming because speed requires quicker reflexes and makes platforming more challenging. You don't see as much exploration either because it's tougher to speed through a level if you don't know where you're going, and additionally higher speed means bigger levels so there's less room for alternate paths. So needless to say, it's a tall order for them to "fix" Sonic because more than likely, some group of fans is going to be alienated by whatever gameplay design they go for, and SEGA is one of the last companies I would expect to be competent enough to handle that.

I'm actually kinda confused (if slightly appreciating) why Sega keeps changing the gameplay after making games that people actually liked. You'd think after Generations they'd keep making games like Generations. Or maybe they saw the recent reactions to Mario and decided they can't make several games in a row whose main mechanics are too similar.

There's the problem.

amended once you ignore Sonic

I'm not certain Sega actually makes games that aren't Sonic? I've been told a new Phantasy Star exists but does it really?