Sonic vs Mario

[Mr Jt (Gog is king)]

Anyone else thought that sonic has more edge as a kid?Mario was always more popular but sonic was way/is way to underrated

[Devsman]

1amayzingman님이 먼저 게시:

Devsman님이 먼저 게시:

Honestly, the best Sonic games are 3D.

Sure, most of the 2D Sonics are way better than most of the 3D Sonics. Sonic Boom. Sonic Secret Rings. Sonic 06.

But Sonic Adventure 1 and 2 were better than anything 2D, and Generations (which is definitely the best) does both.

you cant expect people to take you seriously when ur saying sonic adventure was better than every 2d sonic

Hey, I don't expect anything. The internet is no place for expectations.

Mr Jt님이 먼저 게시:

Sharkster_00님이 먼저 게시:

We will see who will win the video game movie war with Sonic movie 2 or Mario movie Nintendo won the video game movie war in 2019 by beating Sonic 1 by 400 million than 300 million that Sonic 1 made

When it comes to movie this movie is unbeatable https://youtu.be/nltvnKZnm7o

Super Mario Bros movie was so great, lol. People are just mad because it wasn't true to the source material. But for what it was, it was a riot.

[Mr Jt (Gog is king)]

Devsman님이 먼저 게시:

1amayzingman님이 먼저 게시:

you cant expect people to take you seriously when ur saying sonic adventure was better than every 2d sonic

Hey, I don't expect anything. The internet is no place for expectations.

Mr Jt님이 먼저 게시:

When it comes to movie this movie is unbeatable https://youtu.be/nltvnKZnm7o

Super Mario Bros movie was so great, lol. People are just mad because it wasn't true to the source material. But for what it was, it was a riot.

The goombas are the true stars

[Xedhadeaus]

Sonic was cool before the Mario games got to game-cube. Then after that a lot of Mario games Were just better.

I'm guessing SEGA lost the appeal of trying to do things Nintendo did, but better, after they bowed out of the console race. No Sonic Shuffle, Spinball, and their games started going downhill.

[gugnihr]

Sharkster_00님이 먼저 게시:

We will see who will win the video game movie war with Sonic movie 2 or Mario movie Nintendo won the video game movie war in 2019 by beating Sonic 1 by 400 million than 300 million that Sonic 1 made

I consider myself a fan of Sonic but I would never watch a Sonic movie (or a Mario movie, or any movie of this kind).
Expecially not a movie with real actors.
Putting real actors in something like this blasphemous in my opinion.
In my opinion the winners are simply the people who don't watch those movies at all in this case.
Make a nice animated movie with Sonic and maybe I might consider watching it.

[gugnihr]

Xedhadeaus님이 먼저 게시:

Sonic was cool before the Mario games got to game-cube. Then after that a lot of Mario games Were just better.

I'm guessing SEGA lost the appeal of trying to do things Nintendo did, but better, after they bowed out of the console race. No Sonic Shuffle, Spinball, and their games started going downhill.

I think that probably it is very difficult to translate the original speed gimmick of the franchise into 3D, too difficult for the developers maybe, so they decided to take "shortcuts" and workarounds that made the franchise worse.

[Devsman]

gugnihr님이 먼저 게시:

Xedhadeaus님이 먼저 게시:

Sonic was cool before the Mario games got to game-cube. Then after that a lot of Mario games Were just better.

I'm guessing SEGA lost the appeal of trying to do things Nintendo did, but better, after they bowed out of the console race. No Sonic Shuffle, Spinball, and their games started going downhill.

I think that probably it is very difficult to translate the original speed gimmick of the franchise into 3D, too difficult for the developers maybe, so they decided to take "shortcuts" and workarounds that made the franchise worse.

If it was harder to do in 3D, why was it so much better in 3D?

The 2D games--especially the first one--gave you zero reaction time if you ever actually went fast. They'd just end the ground throwing you into a pit, or throw a random enemy at ground level in the middle of an otherwise empty long stretch, or if they just wanted to annoy you instead of screwing you over, they'd just put a spring to bounce you the opposite direction.

I guess the logical explanation is that the original game was not actually about going fast, but it was just a generic platformer while they designed it until they realized it needed a gimmick and quintupled the maximum speed variable without changing the stage design to accommodate. This would also explain why it has a tendency to slow you down all the damn time and make you wait to ride stupid floaty blocks or climb those square stair thingies that spin around.

2 and 3 were a little better but the 2D perspective (especially in 4:3, especially when the sprites are so big) just doesn't accommodate high speed gameplay.

[AdahnGorion]

Sonic? Mario?

Those are just bad copies of Pitfall Harry


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0w5wyguqxE

[Killerwhale]

Nobody with a brain would pick Sonic over Mario, at least in 2022.


If we were in 1980, I'd understand.

[AdahnGorion]

Killerwhale님이 먼저 게시:

Nobody with a brain would pick Sonic over Mario, at least in 2022.


If we were in 1980, I'd understand.

Nobody would pick Sonic in 1980 or even Mario for that matter..

[Killerwhale]

Darkie님이 먼저 게시:

Killerwhale님이 먼저 게시:

Nobody with a brain would pick Sonic over Mario, at least in 2022.


If we were in 1980, I'd understand.

Nobody would pick Sonic in 1980 or even Mario for that matter..

pff, got the date wrong. I meant the 1990's, when it was still up in the air who would become the best.

[crunchyfrog]

Nah.

Well I wasn't a kid when they came out so that's one thing I suppose.

But no I generally thought they were just different games and that's it. I was well used to platofmrers by then as I'd played loads of Donky Kong and then other platofmrers that evolved, mostly on computers like the ZX Spectrum. They varied wildly, so by the time Sonice and Mario came out, they just looked like two differnt any other platfomer.

The characters meant nothing really. I liked that Nintendo carried on Jumpamn and segued into Mario, but I also liked how Sonic looked as it was very much a design of it's time.

Outside that not much.

[𝕎𝔸𝕃𝕋𝔼ℝ]

I think Sonic really was one of the better characters in gaming.

[🦊 Hermit]

Devsman님이 먼저 게시:

The 2D games--especially the first one--gave you zero reaction time if you ever actually went fast. They'd just end the ground throwing you into a pit, or throw a random enemy at ground level in the middle of an otherwise empty long stretch, or if they just wanted to annoy you instead of screwing you over, they'd just put a spring to bounce you the opposite direction.

The times when the games trolled you for going fast were very, very limited in my view. Most of the times when the ground ends, there was another platform to drop to on the other side, or it ended in a ramp up so you could fly through the air and use some in-air control to decide where to come down. And if you were thrown into an enemy, it really didn't matter because you'd likely be spinning in a ball when going that fast, so you'd just smash through them.

Sonic's levels were designed mostly with speed, and conserving momentum, in mind. There were a few platform sections, but those were limited compared to the other sections. And they flowed beautifully - you could get into a real rhythm with them to speed from one loop to the next, one ramp to another, in smooth motions without breaking your stride. It really felt good to string things together.

Plus another factor would be learning the levels. Let's face it, back then, every game forced you to learn layouts of levels so you would have an easier time completing them on second, third etc. playthroughs. Sonic did rely on that a little more than Mario admittedly, because of his speed and momentum. However once you did learn them and were able to anticipate what was coming, the speed and momentum gameplay which was even fun to use before, was turned up to eleven.

[gugnihr]

Devsman님이 먼저 게시:

gugnihr님이 먼저 게시:

I think that probably it is very difficult to translate the original speed gimmick of the franchise into 3D, too difficult for the developers maybe, so they decided to take "shortcuts" and workarounds that made the franchise worse.

If it was harder to do in 3D, why was it so much better in 3D?

It isn't

Devsman님이 먼저 게시:

The 2D games--especially the first one--gave you zero reaction time if you ever actually went fast. They'd just end the ground throwing you into a pit, or throw a random enemy at ground level in the middle of an otherwise empty long stretch,

I think it is just you that are not good enough atr them. I have those problems (but not as bad as you picture them) only in Sonic 2, but since I don't like that specific game too much I don't care, and maybe it is just that since I don't like it I haven't played it much and because of that I'm not good enough at it. Sonic 1 and Soni 3 & K and even Sonic CD are not like that at all.
Of course you can't expect to win in the most impressive way the first time you play them, but this is the same for every other game too

Devsman님이 먼저 게시:

or if they just wanted to annoy you instead of screwing you over, they'd just put a spring to bounce you the opposite direction.

Come on this is what 3D Sonic games do. In every 3D Sonic game you spend at least half of the time that way, including the ones I like (except Unleashed simply because night stages work more like a Ristar game than a Sonic game)

I think that probably this kind of gameplay just isn't for you and you can't play them well enough to truly appreciate them.
Nobody in their right mind would say that the gameplay of 3D Sonic games is better than the 2D ones, expecially the MD original ones.
I love Sonic Unleashed and even I would never say that its gameplay works as good as in the 2D original games. Compared to the original games the gameplay is an unpolished mess.

[crunchyfrog]

Devsman님이 먼저 게시:

gugnihr님이 먼저 게시:

I think that probably it is very difficult to translate the original speed gimmick of the franchise into 3D, too difficult for the developers maybe, so they decided to take "shortcuts" and workarounds that made the franchise worse.

If it was harder to do in 3D, why was it so much better in 3D?

The 2D games--especially the first one--gave you zero reaction time if you ever actually went fast. They'd just end the ground throwing you into a pit, or throw a random enemy at ground level in the middle of an otherwise empty long stretch, or if they just wanted to annoy you instead of screwing you over, they'd just put a spring to bounce you the opposite direction.

I guess the logical explanation is that the original game was not actually about going fast, but it was just a generic platformer while they designed it until they realized it needed a gimmick and quintupled the maximum speed variable without changing the stage design to accommodate. This would also explain why it has a tendency to slow you down all the damn time and make you wait to ride stupid floaty blocks or climb those square stair thingies that spin around.

2 and 3 were a little better but the 2D perspective (especially in 4:3, especially when the sprites are so big) just doesn't accommodate high speed gameplay.

Yup this.

It's all about view and perspective.

2D has you fixed uslaly around the centre point of a scrolling screen. You don't actually move much, the screen does, so you're always bound by half the width of the screen to see what's coming. If they move pretty fast, then it's going to be pretty quick timing you need.

With 3D you get the third angle. And as a conseuqnce you're BEHIND the character, which gieves you and FAR larger viewpoint to see what's coming, largely only inhibited by LOD and pop in.

And as a course, you have more time to react.