Source
I thought this was an interesting take on the Sonic series, and I think this is partly what those people who say "Sonic was never good" are getting at.
On paper, it's not great level design and it doesn't do a great job of teaching the player how to play or what to expect, but that's not really the type of game it is
What do you think, GAF?
In April, the pop musician Lorde gave an interview to the New York Times where she talked about a meeting with famed song writer Max Martin. The genius who helped create Katy Perrys I Kissed a Girl and Taylor Swifts Blank Space, referred to Lordes song Green Light as incorrect songwriting. He saw its early key change, weird melodics and the lack of drums until the chorus kicks in, as improper. It wasnt an insult, just a statement of fact, said Lorde. Its a strange piece of music.
Weirdly, as soon as I read the fascinating little snippet of song craft theory, I thought of Sonic the Hedgehog. The legendary platformer, in which a spiky creature sprints furiously through a series of multi-levelled environments is incorrect game design. It shouldnt work. Its wrong.
If you take a classic platform game design, such as Super Mario Bros the player is always given the chance to read the level: to look ahead and assess every new piece of scenery or patrolling enemy. Then you get a series of neatly placed hazards that present discrete challenges.
In his excellent book on game design, A Theory of Fun, Raph Koster, says the essence of good game design is teaching a well constructed level slowly introduces you to its themes, and shows you how to beat them. Learn, test, master.
Sonic doesnt do this all it establishes at the beginning is that speed is important. In a single playthrough, you only ever get a passing feel for the levels; you miss vast areas all the rules are broken. As in Green Light, the melody and the maths are wrong; new players always find it hard to read the screen, because its not working like a good game.
Even the influences behind Sonic are incorrect. Designer Naoto Ohshima, who sketched all the zones out by hand, was influenced by pinball table design, filling each stage with flippers and bumpers to project Sonic in new directions like a ball-bearing. But pinball doesnt work like video games.
In pinball you understand that you never really have full control over the protagonist (the ball), you are attempting to influence its speed and direction through secondary inputs, through deft touches. But video games are all about control. Players want to inhabit the avatar, ideally with a symbiotic relationship. Sonic even mocks this whole idea, by having the lead character tap his feet impatiently when the player dares to stop for a few seconds. Sonic tells you you are not really in control.
Sonic the Hedgehog punishes the player by manipulating their sense of momentum, by frustrating them into unexpected starts and stops. It is awful to be stuck at the base of a ramp in Sonic, unable to jump your way out, having to wait for the character to accelerate; trying to read the angles so that you spin out of a rut rather than straight back into it.Youre always fighting the system. The maths feels wrong, or at least it feels like the maths is against you.
Sonic is incorrect game design and yet, like Green Light, its a masterpiece. As Lorde sings, you want to just let go, but you cant youre not really free. Yet sometimes in Sonic, when you get better, or through sheer luck, things take off, every jump is right, every loop-the-loop is perfect, and youre in the flow, sailing above the games strange structure. Like the bridge in a brilliant pop song, its an exhilarating rush. Its incorrect, but holy crap, when it works, it works.
I thought this was an interesting take on the Sonic series, and I think this is partly what those people who say "Sonic was never good" are getting at.
On paper, it's not great level design and it doesn't do a great job of teaching the player how to play or what to expect, but that's not really the type of game it is
What do you think, GAF?