In Retrospect, Sonic Heroes is likely the game that destroyed the Sonic franchise.

Voost Kain

Daily Mail headline writer
Jun 6, 2015
1,545
414
460
#1
Sonic Heroes was released at a time when Sonic was still big selling a truckload of copies. But it's also likely the game that actually killed the franchise, to a point where now a mainline game can release with little fanfare.

Sonic Adventure 1 and 2 had their problems but they did something nearly no two Sonic games did since. Improve existing gameplay mechanics over time. Resulting in an arguably better game. It's what the Genesis games did as well.

Sonic Heroes started a trend of exprimenting every game, never really improving mechanics overtime, resulting in several issues during gameplay. Sonic Heroes abandoned the Sonic Adventure formula for levels that were linear in design and a poorly implemented team-based system

In addition to this change, the creators expected the player to play through the same levels four times with the same character types. Levels that in many cases were lazily designed and as said before, very linear. To try and mask this certain stages focus on a gimmick such as pinball and the like.

The worst part is that there were very few improvements made from the previous game,, some things even got worse such as play control. But this game was such a major success Sega decided to permanently follow the formula of Sonic Heroes.

Every major Sonic game after would avoid improving great mechanics by scrapping everything., and starting with a new play style, every major Sonic game since would have similar problems as it's predecessor, every major Sonic game would use gimmicks to distract from issues, lazy design, or to pad out gameplay. Every major Sonic game after would focus more on linear stage design instead of open. Even Sonic 2096 had linear design outside the hubs.

With Sonic Forces, we saw the cycle continue. With poor sales as a result, the brand has been devalued heavily, and ironically the patterm started with Sonic Heroes. The last major success in the franchise.

After all these years it's clear Sega will continue this cycle and never really sit down and evaluate themselves. But the Sonic Heroes Virus seems to have no end in sight. It's not even that bad of a game but it's clear it's influence has caused major damage. At least on the development side.
 
Sep 25, 2015
5,261
2,407
340
Somewhere in space
#2
It certainly marked the downturn, that's for sure.

I remember being so hyped for it as a kid after Adventure 1 and 2, but the whole thing strayed further into gimmickry rather than doubling down the core good shit that was the Sonic / Shadow sections.

The repetition is definitely a black mark against it too- Shadow the Hedgehog did the same thing with the whole good / neutral / bad morality system, and it just comes off as a way to artificially lengthen the game and fight back the dreaded Blockbuster rental market of the time.
 
Last edited:
Nov 4, 2018
941
868
245
#3
i enjoyed it one of the most

honestly. sonic is just not a good video game concept, as its about going as fast as possible nonsensically. funnily how the best sonic game is the one where your more of a platformer. sonic adventure

they need to make him more like crash tbh.
 

Voost Kain

Daily Mail headline writer
Jun 6, 2015
1,545
414
460
#4
i enjoyed it one of the most

honestly. sonic is just not a good video game concept, as its about going as fast as possible nonsensically. funnily how the best sonic game is the one where your more of a platformer. sonic adventure

they need to make him more like crash tbh.
The first 2 Sonic games were never about going fast. If you did that you would die repeatedly. Not sure where you got that from.
 
Jan 12, 2018
2,553
1,850
270
#7
Sonic heroes had a flawed concept but it was more or less mediocre if not below average. It was shadow the edgehog and sonic 2006 that really tipped the series downwards. Especially the latter due to it being hyped as a bit of reboot on a new generation only for it to be the buggiest of the series (before sonic boom) with atrocious loading screens and mediocre gameplay with the cringiest story.

Hell, most fans will tell you that sonic 2006 is by far the worst of the franchise (barring possibly sonic boom)
 
Last edited:
Mar 30, 2015
1,572
164
300
#8
The first 2 Sonic games were never about going fast. If you did that you would die repeatedly. Not sure where you got that from.
They are about going fast, but you can't do it if you don't know the stage well.2D Sonic games are really something unique, think of it as a racing game, when you know the track well, you can drive it faster as oppose to doing it for the first time.
 
Jan 30, 2019
208
118
170
#9
I disagree.

Heroes is bad, no doubt. But Adventure 2 was worse and the start of their own doom, with the introduction of ow the edge and his "sad oh so cool1!" backstory, while most of other characters are mostly pushed aside just to make both Sonic and Shadow look big(and the start of Sayianhog master race). Sonic Adventure 2 also is nothing but improved. Mech gameplay is clanky compared to Gamma(and for some reason Tails is pushed there cuz why not), hunting stages are worse with more time spending unnecessarilly(not to mention Knuckles janky music stages), camera was never improved, etc.

Forces was doomed since the start with again the "edgy" premise and a create your character, because Sonic franchise doesnt have enought characters to make them playable so dress your character as Knuckles and pretend he is playable.

And for those who keep spamming "hey they sold gazillions", they didnt even mentioned this game on todays panel. That tells you something.
 
Last edited:
Jan 31, 2018
178
407
215
#10
I agree. Sonic Heroes wasn't that bad, but it's definitely the start of SEGA's/Sonic Team's trend of rushing out a game with a bunch of new mechanics and hoping it works.

I think it says a lot that the 2 most well-recieved sonic games in the past 15 years are Sonic Generations and Sonic Mania.
Those two games focused on keeping what was good about older sonic games rather than trying to innovate. And one of them wasn't even made by Sonic Team.
 
Sep 4, 2016
182
22
190
#11
Honestly Sonic Heroes is the Sonic game I had the most fun with, well that or Adventure 2.

I'm guessing it was more the back-to-back combo of Shadow the Hedgehog and Sonic 06 which started the series moving in a negative direction.
 
Last edited:
Sep 17, 2012
8,843
635
520
#12
Sonic Adventure hub exploration levels were very boring. I liked that Sonic Heroes put you straight into action like the 2d games. But it played like a 3d ps1 game so it was a step backwards.
 
Jun 30, 2010
5,175
95
615
Earth
#13
Heroes fucking sucks ass. The 3D sonic games have always been janky but this game went out of it's way to make them stand out even more. The way your partners just awkwardly move around without proper animations teleporting characters when swapping the ugliness was a feature. The team battles were a mess.


Chaotix also sucked ass because of the inclusion of another stupid and unnecessary mechanic.
 
Last edited:
Jun 1, 2014
4,048
561
330
#14
Sonic Heroes needed more time. With more refined controls (less bugs and glitches), it would have a been a great Sonic game.

I remember raging a lot because of glitches that would sometimes happen when changing rail, or walking on walls.
 
Nov 30, 2012
12,168
938
690
#16
It was Sonic Adventure 1.

The game was semi-decent but it clearly showed the direction Sonic Team wanted to take. A more obnoxious Sonic character, complete with a redesign than makes him look "cooler" and voice acting from hell, more (obnoxious) Sonic friends and a focus on storytelling that only little children would care about. That was the beginning of the end for the franchise.
 
Jul 13, 2013
4,879
95
375
www.twitch.tv
#18
I’d say this belongs to Adventure. 3D Blast and R are much more in line with what Sonic is than Adventure. Hell, Adventure even destroyed the look of Sonic as well as the gameplay.

Adventure lacked the polish of all the previous games and tried to do too much, without doing any of it well. I can tell you that personally I was a huge Sonic fan until I played this one.
 
Last edited:
Likes: nkarafo
Nov 11, 2016
239
181
200
#19
It pains me to say it, but like many have already noted, it was probably Sonic Adventure 1. Breaking into 3D was a difficult hurdle to overcome and the developers really missed the mark. Every game that came after it was modeled off of adventure 1's flawed game design.

If I want to get overly specific, though, the death of Sonic was the death of the Dreamcast. Even though Adventure 1 and 2 were rough, they were fine for the Dreamcast. Once Sonic was no longer a mascot, he lost that special sauce. A new Sonic game was no longer an event. A new Sonic game was just a new game that had to compete with other, better developed, games and he didn't stand a chance. It'd be nice if someone could figure out how to do Sonic in a 3D environment that was a legitimately fun evolution of the traditional 2D gameplay instead of trying to use Adventure as the starting point.
 
Likes: Spukc
Jan 31, 2019
54
52
160
#24
i enjoyed it one of the most

honestly. sonic is just not a good video game concept, as its about going as fast as possible nonsensically. funnily how the best sonic game is the one where your more of a platformer. sonic adventure

they need to make him more like crash tbh.
Yeah, I loved Sonic heroes and probably put more time into it than any sonic game.

Though I was 11 at the time and not much of a game critic so idk. I just remember having tons of fun with it.
 
Jun 29, 2017
233
110
170
#25
As an old time Sega fanboy, this thread breaks my heart. But there's no lies being told. I think it's very telling that the best Sonic game of this millennium (Sonic Mania), isn't even made by Sega.
 
May 4, 2005
12,711
1,390
1,240
31
Germany
www.gaming-universe.de
#28
The first 2 Sonic games were never about going fast. If you did that you would die repeatedly. Not sure where you got that from.
The second one definitely is about going fast. Very fast. The first one is a bit stop and go, but the second one is where the speed really settled in into the series.

Also I disagree that Sonic Heroes marks any sort of downfall for the series. Shadow the Hedgehog and Sonic the Hedgehog afterwards? Sure, but Heroes is fine.
 
Likes: Vader1
Dec 17, 2018
27
21
80
#29
Personally I'm just convinced that the people holding the reigns of this franchise are just divas who aren't anywhere near as talented as they've been led to believe, and that it's been that way for a while now.

Same shit that turned Final Fantasy mediocre over the years.
 
Last edited:
Oct 12, 2014
1,652
103
305
#30
Sonic Adventure 1 and 2 had their problems but they did something nearly no two Sonic games did since. Improve existing gameplay mechanics over time. Resulting in an arguably better game. It's what the Genesis games did as well.
I disagree. The Sonic/Shadow levels have no improvement to them , Knuckles/Rouge levels have gone from passable to utter crap due to the levels now being gigantic and you now only have the radar activated for one emerald at the time. Oh yeah and the Tails/Eggman stages are almost as boring as Big's level in 1.
 
Likes: Saberyoko
Jun 1, 2014
4,048
561
330
#31
Personally I'm just convinced that the people holding the reigns of this franchise are just divas who aren't anywhere near as talented as they've been led to believe, and that it's been that way for a while now.
I believe that the people responsible for the Sonic franchise designed games for kids and teens in the nineties, and still design games for the kids and teens today. However we are now 20 years older, which explains a lot on our appreciation of the games.

Of course old gamers like us won't appreciate many aspects of Forces, however I can easily see how it can resonate to a younger audience.
 
Last edited:

Voost Kain

Daily Mail headline writer
Jun 6, 2015
1,545
414
460
#32
, think of it as a racing game, when you know the track well, you can drive it faster as oppose to doing it for the first time.
Sure if you're drunk, Sonic doesn't play like a racing game at all. The original games were using momentum to get to certain places with a slight exploration aspect, and going fast was needed to do that. Reflexs were also a thing.
 

Voost Kain

Daily Mail headline writer
Jun 6, 2015
1,545
414
460
#33
People are putting games they disliked the most than the point of this thread, which game actually caused the developers to continue down a losing pattern that gives us the modern Sonic games of today, and while Sonic Adventure 1 had issues, at least Sonic Adventure 2 attempted to improve things whether you agree with those attempts or not is another thing, but they at least seemed like they were trying, where Sonic heroes introduced the scrap everything and redo the engine and pad the games out with gimmicks with near no improvements until now, among other issues. Not many games really follow anything SA1 did. But almost all the problems that have been in the last several games did appear near the same way in Heroes.

The second one definitely is about going fast.
Just stage 2 with chemical zone in the second punishes you for going fast, usually down a bottomless pit.
 
Mar 30, 2015
1,572
164
300
#34
Sure if you're drunk, Sonic doesn't play like a racing game at all. The original games were using momentum to get to certain places with a slight exploration aspect, and going fast was needed to do that. Reflexs were also a thing.
Never said it plays like a racing, I gave a example of something it shares with racing games.
 
Jun 23, 2013
2,134
29
365
#35
i've played a looooot of SA1 and 2, and heroes was indeed super bad in comparison. Also, when you play the ports of SA1 and 2, you are not really playing the DC version, the original version was not buggy at all compared to the atrocities i've seen in the ports of those games.

Sonic Generations is awesome, i really wish we had an stable sonic team working on those games and improving upon them.
 
Jan 30, 2019
208
118
170
#37
People are putting games they disliked the most than the point of this thread, which game actually caused the developers to continue down a losing pattern that gives us the modern Sonic games of today, and while Sonic Adventure 1 had issues, at least Sonic Adventure 2 attempted to improve things
Totally false. Adventure 2 didn't try to improve at all. The game still has their famous cameras issues, Sonic/Shadow stages are linear and worse compared to Adventure Sonic stages which is more close to plataforming than gotta go fast, Tails/Eggman is terrible in comparison with Gamma which at least feel more responsive and Knuckles/Rouge stages where a massive time wasting with emerald hunting felt like a chore to find. After playing a bunch of times SA2, in no freaking way I could believe this game is an improved no matter how people try to digest that. And it's not like I'm even trying to defend Heroes, which is a mess as well.
 
Last edited:

Voost Kain

Daily Mail headline writer
Jun 6, 2015
1,545
414
460
#39
Did you even attempt to read the thread?

Totally false. Adventure 2 didn't try to improve at all. The game still has their famous cameras issues, Sonic/Shadow stages are linear and worse compared to Adventure Sonic stages which is more close to plataforming than gotta go fast, Tails/Eggman is terrible in comparison with Gamma which at least feel more responsive and Knuckles/Rouge stages where a massive time wasting with emerald hunting felt like a chore to find. After playing a bunch of times SA2, in no freaking way I could believe this game is an improved no matter how people try to digest that. And it's not like I'm even trying to defend Heroes, which is a mess as well.
SA1's open levels were choppy and riddle with bugs and you'd often clip through objects. The graphics improved, the play control improved for the characters themselves, and the animations were also better than the weird mouth movements and ragdoll physics they used in SA 1.

Sure some parts were worse but let's not pretend NONE of SA2 was an improvement.
 
Jan 30, 2019
208
118
170
#42
SA1's open levels were choppy and riddle with bugs and you'd often clip through objects. The graphics improved, the play control improved for the characters themselves, and the animations were also better than the weird mouth movements and ragdoll physics they used in SA 1.
Adventure 2 has a lot of bugs as well, control is not improved to the point of feeling clanky, Sonic levels are very straight foward, etc etc.

Whats the point of calling an improvement if its only things here and there? Now it feels more like you put Adventure 2 as better than Heroes because you like the game and is not content with some people not agreeing with you.

That being said, thanks to that game they created things like Heroes and Shadow the Hedgehog. This game is the very root of the problem.
 
Last edited:
Dec 20, 2018
756
607
225
Rio de Janeiro
#43
Show me where I said it's my least favorite Sonic game then?
'
In Retrospect, Sonic Heroes is likely the game that destroyed the Sonic franchise.
'
Replace 'Sonic Heroes' for 'Shadow the Hedgehog'. Your thread act like a question and the same time your guess is 'Sonic Heroes' was the game who gave Sonic franchise a bad reputation. For me was the game in my post.
I'm even surprised that this thread is not a poll.
 

Voost Kain

Daily Mail headline writer
Jun 6, 2015
1,545
414
460
#45
'
In Retrospect, Sonic Heroes is likely the game that destroyed the Sonic franchise.
'
Replace 'Sonic Heroes' for 'Shadow the Hedgehog'. Your thread act like a question and the same time your guess is 'Sonic Heroes' was the game who gave Sonic franchise a bad reputation. For me was the game in my post.
I'm even surprised that this thread is not a poll.
Don't be dumb. I never said in the thread that Heroes was my least favorite. I said it started the trend we see now. Don't get emotional.
 
Jan 30, 2019
208
118
170
#46
Well if you fail. Play the DLC of Sonic Unleashed. You will constantly get punished for every mistake. But it is all about going fast. Just as a high speed / arcade platformer should be.
Yeah true, the entire game is kinda punishing saving for a few momments. I believe werehog is a better offender, with some plataforming that most of times results in botomless traps.
 
Last edited:

Voost Kain

Daily Mail headline writer
Jun 6, 2015
1,545
414
460
#47
Adventure 2 has a lot of bugs as well, control is not improved to the point of feeling clanky, Sonic levels are very straight foward, etc etc.

Whats the point of calling an improvement if its only things here and there? Now it feels more like you put Adventure 2 as better than Heroes because you like the game and is not content with some people not agreeing with you.

That being said, thanks to that game they created things like Heroes and Shadow the Hedgehog. This game is the very root of the problem.
No the issue is your emotional attachment to SA1. Even dev information shows improvements to the engine. Also your downplaying SA1's bugs by acting like SA2 has comparable bugs.

Not even the biggest SA1 fan is going to make a similar claim. And almost all the Sonic trends as listed came from Heroes because some didn't exist im SA1.
 
Nov 11, 2018
263
176
235
#48
Sonic Heroes is a game I respect. While flawed in a lot of areas, there's at least a sense of polish and effort put into it from a technical perspective, even if the end result is a bit middling. I'd argue Shadow the Hedgehog did more damage to the franchise. That was the turning point where the series just started feeling very directionless and clumsy. It was also where the "Ow the edge" tone really started getting out of hand.
 
Dec 20, 2018
756
607
225
Rio de Janeiro
#49
Don't be dumb. I never said in the thread that Heroes was my least favorite. I said it started the trend we see now. Don't get emotional.
You're the guy getting emotional here. You see, the game who the gave Sonic Franchise bad raputation can be many. If you search on google, facebook, twitter or even youtube you can even get articles and countless youtube videos trying to solve that. Actually I can't believe people still have doub about this question.
Instead, you post this:
People are putting games they disliked the most than the point of this thread, which game actually caused the developers to continue down a losing pattern that gives us the modern Sonic games of today, and while Sonic Adventure 1 had issues, at least Sonic Adventure 2 attempted to improve things whether you agree with those attempts or not is another thing, but they at least seemed like they were trying, where Sonic heroes introduced the scrap everything and redo the engine and pad the games out with gimmicks with near no improvements until now, among other issues. Not many games really follow anything SA1 did. But almost all the problems that have been in the last several games did appear near the same way in Heroes.
You're asking for a question with so many different answers. Just leave people posting their guesses.
Which brings me to another question: If I had agreed with you?
 
Jan 30, 2019
208
118
170
#50
No the issue is your emotional attachment to SA1. Even dev information shows improvements to the engine. Also your downplaying SA1's bugs by acting like SA2 has comparable bugs.

Not even the biggest SA1 fan is going to make a similar claim. And almost all the Sonic trends as listed came from Heroes because some didn't exist im SA1.
Whats wrong dude? Already going to the "emotional" lame argument? Cool down a bit, no need to get triggered.

And it's not like Adventure 1 is a good game either. The game may have being praise for it's time, but again most of problems derives from bugs, glitches and poor camera angles. But thats not to say that Adventure 2 is a good thing, most of those things are present in the game, with camera being the signature problem from them(present in Heroes and Shadow).
 
Last edited: