Sonic and the Secret Rings

Penny Arcade summed that up quite nicely. All games are on rails to a degree. Every game is about controlled situations. The player can never do something that wasn’t programmed into the game (unless it’s a bug, of course). Even if the player uses a gameplay element in a way that wasn’t originally planned, it’s still within the framework of the game’s programming. Everything is controlled.

The issue I have with people making the comment that it’s “on rails” is that most people talk about wanting the series to return to its roots. The contradiction there is that the original Sonic games were all about pressing “right” and occasionally jumping. Sonic and the Secret Rings, IMO, captures the feeling of that sort of speed, but with deeper controls.

It just boils down to psychology. That argument is similar to pointing out that a book will always just be a linear sequence of words, which kind of serves to dismiss the relevance of continuity and narrative development.

This is not a critique of the game, since I haven’t actually played it, but there’s a nebulous line that can be crossed. If playing through a game feels like you’re always just following the instructions at every moment… then it severely limits any sense of accomplishment for some people.

I felt that the 3D Sonic games were more on rails than the original 2D games. Although they essentially just replaced run right and press jump at the right time with run forward press jump at the right time, it was significantly harder to move backwards through the level, and in some cases impossible. Plus, the restrictive camera often forced the view back in the direction where you were meant to be going when you were trying to explore.

I’m just hoping Sonic and the Secret Rings is a fun, solid Sonic game though. It’s been a long time since one of those came out on a console.

[quote=“Solo Wing Dragon”]I felt that the 3D Sonic games were more on rails than the original 2D games. Although they essentially just replaced run right and press jump at the right time with run forward press jump at the right time, it was significantly harder to move backwards through the level, and in some cases impossible. Plus, the restrictive camera often forced the view back in the direction where you were meant to be going when you were trying to explore.

I’m just hoping Sonic and the Secret Rings is a fun, solid Sonic game though. It’s been a long time since one of those came out on a console.[/quote]

Thats very true , I’m just amazed after getting everything so right with Sonic Adv , that SEGA mess up the likes of Shadow and Sonic Next Gen and get eveything so wrong . It’s horrible to see Sonic Team do a CORE and what they Tomb Raider , and see Sonic rundown to the ground .
I loved Sonic Adv and still play it today , but I know SONIC in trouble when he my brother kid stops playing Sonic 360 becasue he hates it , and this is a kid that loves Sonic and even enjoyed the likes of Heroes .

Its just not good enough , I sure hope people in the Sonic Team know how bad Sonic Next Gen really is ,and make sure it will never happen again

Has anyone here played this game yet? What are your impressions, if you have?

It’s actually rather good. I even think some places underrated the game.

It deserves an 8-9 out of 10 if you are an oldschool Sonic fan. The speedy sections are very well refined.

Forget Gamespot etc. They are quick to label the on-rails gameplay as outdated while praising the likes of God of War 2 whose gameplay is 20 years old as God’s gift to gamers (which makes them hypocrits).

When you look at how polished this game is, one can only wonder why the next gen Sonic game was so unfinished.

This is so typical of Sega recently. I hope this one sells well.

The Neo games have sold well in Japan though which seems to reinforce the notion that trend jumping works.

However, Sega not taking Camelot’s offer to port SF III to a portable platform by converting it into 2D to make the game marketable in this day and age, thus giving them an excuse to translate the whole trilogy is just inexcusable.

It’s one of those injustices that will never be set right. Maybe if we lived in a perfect world people would jump at the chance to translate more games for more people to enjoy.

I suspect that a new Nights is on the way for the Wii. Golden Axe is being resurrected from the dead, so not all hope is lost. Please include the original arcade games in the newest incarnation Sega, not the Genesis/Mega Drive conversion and psuedo-sequels!

Actually Abadd, you ask them. Use the Force to persuade them like I know you can.

Um… source?

In a fantasy land where things are created by limitless numbers of fairies and where game stores have infinite shelf space and they buy every game ever created by game companies and storage of unsold copies of games was free for all eternity and etc etc, yeah, every game would be localized.

In all seriousness, though, whatever the reasoning behind the original decision regarding Shining Force was, it has nothing to do with the recent activity surrounding the Shining Force games. Just because someone wants to make a certain game, doesn’t mean that people will be able to sell it.

We’ve been over this Abadd, and you know how I feel.

If you want to look at the world and tell me that everything is perfect, be my guest. It’s idealists that change the world, not defenders of the status quo.

The source is 1.up.com. The article was instigated by Sega of America. The chance was there (the head of Camelot offered to do the job in the hopes that others could finally enjoy the whole story while keeping the game “marketable” to rake in those “precious” profits" to justify the port). It was not taken. That was Sega’s own failing.

Why? You tell me. Pride goeth before the fall, and all that. I have long since stopped caring but let’s face it: it’s an injustice no matter how you look at it.

Call me a dreamer, but I kind of feel my life slipping away now and I won’t be content to say that, hey, everything is actually fine. Because it isn’t no matter how much you may try to defend it. Life is too damn short to waste on digging metaphorical trenches.

Yeah in this real perfect world we live in we apparently invaded Iraq to ensure lower oil prices. You want to defend that too? The motivations are all basically the same (the spice must flow). Give me your land of fairies any day.

I know your take on the series, but was just wondering where you got that specific bit of info from. Sega America would have no direct dealings with Camelot, so it would be strange that Sega America would issue a statement regarding them and the Shining Force series. If anything, I could see a comment being made about the Saturn days saying that Camelot was ready to do the localization on the remainder of the series, but Sega America wasn’t able to… but nothing in recent history.

Not saying that everything is perfect. Just saying that there is a whoooole lot of gray area in the real world. There are more moving parts than you could ever imagine. Yes, you have innovators who, on the rare occasion, break the mold and forge new ground, but for that to happen the stars have to align, the seven seals opened, and all four Crystals must be gathered. No easy task.

Bull! (nothing personal)

Lack of professionalism that’s what it is.

Um… in regards to what? There’s an entire conversation that preceded your comment - it would help if you let me know what you think is bull so I can explain why you’re wrong :wink:

I dunno if I should indulge you or not… :stuck_out_tongue:

Your last paragraph basically (which is mean to summarize (sp?) your point in a metaphorical way).

I’m still not sure I understand your comment of “lacks professionalism.”

All I’m saying is that there is more to building and selling games than “just make the game and it will sell.” Limited resources within production, limited marketing budgets, limited interest from retailers, etc. Every once in a while, you get a game like Katamari Damacy that defies all convention and happens to find its perfect niche and does quite nicely, in spite of it all. However, those can hardly ever be planned for. Namco’s never had that happen before, and they haven’t been able to reproduce it since. Sony tried something similar with Loco Roco on PSP, and it came nowhere near the success of Katamari (which wasn’t huge anyway).

It’s like playing a craps table. If you bet all your chips on a bunch of random things, even if you end up winning on some of your bets, the losses you have from your other bets ends up negating anything you would have won otherwise. The trick is to know the odds, and play them well. And when you’ve got enough of a lead, start placing little bets on “hunches.”

Okay, so it’s not a perfect example, but it shows how you can’t simply make a game because you think it’s cool. Those are called vanity projects or “developing in a vacuum.” Even if there is some demand, what happens if, for example, retailers simply aren’t interested in selling the title? Or only buying small quantities? Or, what if the cost of building the game exceeds the projected revenue based on forecasts? What happens if first party simply doesn’t want a game like that on their console?

For example, if Walmart doesn’t want to sell the kind of game you are making, you won’t reach full distribution in the US (for example), so you are almost instantly relegated to sub-100k sales, simply because it will never reach critical mass.

Not saying that any or all of these things related to Shining Force, but just to give you an example of external forces that cause games to be what they are that you likely never give thought to.

It’s just that I find Geoffrey’s use of quotations around “precious profits” a bit, well, naive. Do you expect game companies to just sit around and lose money? Do you expect developers/publishers to be denied any raises or even get salary cuts because the games they are making aren’t making any money?

The comparisons between the fact that SF3 wasn’t released in the US and the war in Iraq were especially rich. It’s mind-boggling that that association can be freely made in someone’s mind.

Geoffrey says that he’d rather have the land of fairies that I describe, and that’s just, as I mention earlier, naive. I would personally take the real world . Learn how it works and try to fix it within realistic limits. Hoping for magic to happen in the world will get nothing done. Wishing and hoping does nothing. You want to see things like Shining Force 3 make stateside? Let Sega concentrate on becoming profitable and growing as a company, then once they have the revenue to be able to support things like that, start to make some noise. Demanding that Sega make games that will likely not satisfy anyone but yourself will get nobody anywhere.

(Just as a side note - I am vehemently anti-war, have been against the war since day one, and am regularly active in politics. Having friends who are overseas in Iraq, it is a bit offensive to think that having been denied parts of Shining Force 3 is equatable to the injustices that have occurred in Iraq is simply absurd. Perhaps you were being hyperbolic, but come on now.)

Not saying that any or all of these things related to Shining Force, but just to give you an example of external forces that cause games to be what they are that you likely never give thought to.

Maybe I have Abadd.

What I meant is in the REAL world a good product always sells unless there is lack of professionalism as far as other variables are concerned.

Was Halo a success because it had a big marketing campaign?
Was God of War?

Maybe some marketing had influence but at the end of the day quality and word of mouth are the main factors I think.That’s how I come to know most games anyway.

If a game is good and people start noticing it marketing adapts itself.

Of course marketing can sell bad games too.And of course with 0(zero) marketing no game will hit mainstream.

Marketing is fulcral for a game to sell but that doesn’t mean it has to be extraordinary.It just needs to be there.It’s a part of a proccess.But the deciding factor is really quality.

PS:I know I’m not good with examples but it’s all in my head :slight_smile:

I think what Geoffrey was meaning here wasn’t that not translating Shining Force III was as bad as the war on Iraq. But rather he felt that money was ultimately the only motivation in both cases, and that wasn’t necessarily the best course of action when considering the wishes of all parties involved. If that is what he meant, then he does have a point IMO, especially given how Sega is currently treating fans of the series.

[quote=“Gehpnaet”]
What I meant is in the REAL world a good product always sells unless there is lack of professionalism as far as other variables are concerned.

Was Halo a success because it had a big marketing campaign?
Was God of War?[/quote]

Of course - most of the time, the games that are huge successes are very good games. I’ve never said anything that contradicts that. However, how many of those games are innovative and groundbreaking?

Halo - a very solid FPS that followed in the footsteps of Bungie’s previous efforts, with a hint of Half-Life 2
God of War - a very solid action game that revitalized the genre, but it’s essentially Devil May Cry meets Rygar
Gears of War - Great 3rd person shooter. But it’s kill.switch.

I could go on. So what makes a game successful? The right developer. The right publisher. The right content. All brought together with the right marketing campaign. How many games do you know of that were huge successes that didn’t have huge marketing campaigns?

Now compare that to good games that didn’t sell and didn’t have big marketing campaigns: Beyond Good and Evil, Psychonauts, Rocket Slime, Phoenix Wright, etc.

Having a good game is NOT enough. You need to have a good game that will be sold by a publisher who has the ability to get it on store shelves and that is willing to spend the money to market it to get it to the people. But, before all that, not only does it have to be a good game, it has to be a relevant game. The theme (setting, wrapper, whatever you want to call it) needs to be something that resonates with enough people for the game to sell.

Perhaps it is different in Portugal - I won’t even pretend to know. Sure, bad word of mouth can kill a title, but people simply won’t know about it unless there’s a lot of marketing money behind it.

The exception to this rule, however, is licensed/movie-based games for kids/younger audiences. Review scores (i.e. general quality) has no effect on sales. None. It’s all about the marketing and the license. Which is unfortunate… Licenses for older gamers (like LOTR, etc) are affected by game quality, but going back to my point about something needing to be relevant, even if a licensed game is of good quality, if the movie isn’t successful or if people don’t care about the license, the game won’t sell (see: Chronicles of Riddick).

[quote=“Solo Wing Dragon”]
I think what Geoffrey was meaning here wasn’t that not translating Shining Force III was as bad as the war on Iraq. But rather he felt that money was ultimately the only motivation in both cases, and that wasn’t necessarily the best course of action when considering the wishes of all parties involved. If that is what he meant, then he does have a point IMO, especially given how Sega is currently treating fans of the series.[/quote]

There are two reasons for a company to ever do anything - credibility and profit. Sometimes a company needs to do things to earn credibility with people, but most of the time, it simply needs to make a profit to keep the doors open.

However, comparing a company’s goal to make a profit (which is only a small part of the overall equation when talking about SF3, and yet it’s the only thing Geoffrey ever talks about) to a government’s lying and killing of innocents is mind boggling. Even if the point was about profits, it’s a weak reductio ad absurdum argument that simply doesn’t work. One is motivation toward a goal for a company whose primary purpose is to run a business, the other is a motivation toward an extremely questionable goal by using illegal and fatal means. By comparing it to the Iraq war, that’s paramount to saying that any endeavor in which money is the goal is bad.

What about Myst??

Oh and Beyond Good and Evil etc fall into my “bad marketing” area.Bad marketing as opposed to competent marketing.Not bad marketing as opposed to great marketing.

Actually, Psychonauts was more of a “lack of marketing” rather than “bad marketing.” Majesco was in financial trouble and didn’t have the ability to market the game. But, according to your logic, it shouldn’t have mattered. It was a great game and had lots of good word of mouth. Yet it has barely sold.

Actually, I take that back. Your prior post sort of contradicted itself. You say on one hand that marketing “may” have a hand in helping games sell, yet without marketing, no game would ever hit the mainstream. Can’t have it both ways. Either marketing affects game sales or it doesn’t.

As for Myst, the original was marketed like crazy. It was all over the PC magazines, there were tons of ads, etc.