A place for those who "Trust the Fungus"

Posted: **Mon Dec 26, 2011 7:50 pm**

MODERATOR'S NOTICE: This topic was created from discussions split from the "Super Mario Bros/SatAM: Do Great Minds Think Alike?" thread.

Maybe it's just because I'm something of a Nintendo bigot, but personally, I hate Sonic the Hedgehog. I tried playing the games, but I could never get into them-- they're not for me. And it makes my stomach churn nowadays when I see Mario's greatest nemesis along side him in "Nintendo Olympics," or any other game they star in together-- to me, Sonic will always be the enemy of Mario and I'm never going to be able to look past my odd distrust of Sega even now that they're part of Nintendo. Because think about it, name one good system Sega made after the release of the Genesis, CD and 32X-- oh that's right, you can't. The Saturn was terrible, and the Dreamcast was even worse. Mario wins in any "Mario versus Sonic" argument.

Posted: **Wed Dec 28, 2011 12:34 am**

Cor, they'd love you on Gallifrey Base. :wink:

Posted: **Wed Dec 28, 2011 4:26 am**

Serum wrote:Maybe it's just because I'm something of a Nintendo bigot, but personally, I hate Sonic the Hedgehog. I tried playing the games, but I could never get into them-- they're not for me. And it makes my stomach churn nowadays when I see Mario's greatest nemesis along side him in "Nintendo Olympics," or any other game they star in together-- to me, Sonic will always be the enemy of Mario and I'm never going to be able to look past my odd distrust of Sega even now that they're part of Nintendo. Because think about it, name one good system Sega made after the release of the Genesis, CD and 32X-- oh that's right, you can't. The Saturn was terrible, and the Dreamcast was even worse. Mario wins in any "Mario versus Sonic" argument.

...except "who has the better and/or longer-running comic book?"

Actually, I'm just going to stick my neck out and say that Sonic's probably had the sweeter deal on major licensing in general.

Oh, and Sonic & SEGA All-Stars Racing is a better racing game than Mario Kart Wii.

...hey, Mario's my main man (I don't want to go into the rest of that, because that might get weird), but acknowledging where others succeed and applying that to your own methods can only prove beneficial.

Posted: **Wed Dec 28, 2011 8:06 am**

Serum wrote:Maybe it's just because I'm something of a Nintendo bigot, but personally, I hate Sonic the Hedgehog. I tried playing the games, but I could never get into them-- they're not for me. And it makes my stomach churn nowadays when I see Mario's greatest nemesis along side him in "Nintendo Olympics," or any other game they star in together-- to me, Sonic will always be the enemy of Mario and I'm never going to be able to look past my odd distrust of Sega even now that they're part of Nintendo. Because think about it, name one good system Sega made after the release of the Genesis, CD and 32X-- oh that's right, you can't. The Saturn was terrible, and the Dreamcast was even worse. Mario wins in any "Mario versus Sonic" argument.

Ohh, well I am actually a massive SEGA and Sonic fan. Actually, I help run the Summer of Sonic convention (Actually in charge of it this year) in the UK and to be honest, the Mario side of the coin ain't so shiny mate.

Firstly, SEGA is not part of Nintendo, nor will they ever be. SEGA supports them (The same as Sony and Microsoft), but they would as they are third party. In actuality SEGA is one of the very very few companies providing anything resembling variation on Nintendo's dismally dull Wii system. Nintendo pumps out it's obvious efforts, very few actually including anything resembling effort (Mario Party, Mario Kart etc have all gone way below an average level of quality), but with some golden nuggets now and then - a sign of a company dying with the over-stretched and aging Miyamoto and little else in reserve. Capcom were showing some initiative at first, but pulled out due to lacking sales of more mature or non-party games.

SEGA still provide House of the Dead, MadWorld, The Conduit, NiGHTS, Ghost Squad, Sonic and the Secret Rings, SEGA and Sonic All Stars Racing, Sonic Colors... the list is built on games that are genuinely different to the flood of childish party games the Wii is overburdened with. Not to mention one of the best Nintendo racers (F-Zero GX) was made solely by Sega.

Also your 'distrust' of SEGA is, as you say, odd. SEGA made several good consoles, they certainly made lots of mistakes but your view of the Dreamcast as terrible? Hell the Saturn fought the N64 quite well in Japan thanks to it's stronger ability at 2D shooting (Which is a big genre over there) and the superior marketing of Segata Sanshiro. I'm not about to say it was better than the N64, because it wasn't, but as a complex piece of tech it did offer minor advantages over both Sony and Nintendo's home offerings. The Dreamcast was an amazing console that easily has as many top titles as the GameCube despite a brief lifespan of only 2 years. Nintendo's GameCube nor their Wii have achieved half as much in terms of new gameplay experiences as the Dreamcast managed to hit home, and the Wii has a controller advantage. I can understand believing the Saturn was bad, but the Dreamcast? It literally invented online gaming on home systems - I guess Nintendo fans wouldn't get that though since the Wii online is about as good as a chocolate teapot.

Outside of the techie cack, let's go back to your final statement. "Mario wins any Mario versus Sonic arguement". Does he? He's made that big an impact on people's lives? He's brought that many people together? I actually know for a fact that Mario has done less for community than Sonic. Not only does Sonic have the UK convention Summer of Sonic (Which is fan-made and run by fans, now with backing by SEGA), but before then the team that runs it has been involved with mass London meet-ups since 2004. Before the first Mario vs Sonic game was available, SEGA held a fan-event in their London offices and invited 20 Sonic fans and 20 Mario fans from various forums to play it in advance of it's release and all said they'd turn up. Of that number 18 Sonic fans turned up for the event, only 2 Mario fans bothered coming. The day was split into two halves, one of which was won by a Mario fan, but at the end of the day those two went home alone and the 18 Sonic fans met up in a pub in London and had a drink and a laugh together.

These are all factual events, I've been involved with them (And no, I don't work for SEGA before that suggestion is made). I lost to the Mario fan, but goddamn he understood the true dumb power of Waluigi before he left! XD Until the Mario fanbase can say they've put their own time and money into meeting up, setting up events and working together I have to say that they are lower than Sonic in the grand scheme of things, even if the game series didn't suffer as big a lull as the Sonic series did (But that's only because Mario fans conveniently forget terribly appalling games such as Double Dash, Mario Parties 4 to 8, Mario Sunshine, Mario Sports Mix, Mario Power Sluggers...)

At their best, neither two minds think alike, but both achieve great results. Super Mario 64 was a stand-out piece of genius - one that has become muddied by such a high frequency of re-releasing -, Super Mario Galaxy was brilliant, the original Super Mario Bros is still my most played game on my mobile phone. Sonic CD is one of the best 2D games of it's era (Despite the Mega CD never taking off due to lacking support otherwise), Sonic 3 & Knuckles is a mean feat to top, Sonic Adventure was a stylish leap to 3D gaming (Though not as fantastic as Super Mario 64) and Sonic Colors is definately one of, if not the best, platformer on the Wii. Sonic Generations is good for a touch too.

But Sonic and Mario never think alike. If they did, a cross-over platforming game would have been done years ago due to it's simplicity. But because of the difference between their focuses and playing styles would mean a cross-over would be possible, but would be a minefield to blend together well.

Posted: **Wed Dec 28, 2011 11:37 am**

Oh no, Mario hasn't made that big an impact at ALL. Only one thing maybe let,s see, maybe THE ENTIRE GAMING INDUSTRY! If it wasn't for the first SMB game, gaming would've died out a long time ago. Besides Sonic games have sucked too. Like Sonic (2006), Sonic Unleashed, Shadow the Hedgehog. Just because Mario had bad games doesn't mean he's now bad, it just means he's had bad games! Plus let's admit it here, SEGA got themselves in the third party business because they used to have their own consoles as you all know.

However before that, Sega spent nearly thousands of money on crappy add-ons to increase the Genesis life-span which never happened because they were fastly made with no real effort. One final note, those silly party games as you call them are there to bring families to TOGETHER! Yeah, that's a stupid thing to do!

Posted: **Wed Dec 28, 2011 12:21 pm**

1upmushroom wrote:Sega spent nearly thousands of money on crappy add-ons to increase the Genesis life-span which never happened because they were fastly made with no real effort.

Nintendo is just as guilty of releasing pointless peripherals for their systems, as well. The "Super GameBoy" and the "Satellaview" were released for the Super Nintendo and the "64DD" was released for the N64 in Japan.

Posted: **Wed Dec 28, 2011 4:23 pm**

1upmushroom wrote:Oh no, Mario hasn't made that big an impact at ALL. Only one thing maybe let,s see, maybe THE ENTIRE GAMING INDUSTRY! If it wasn't for the first SMB game, gaming would've died out a long time ago. Besides Sonic games have sucked too. Like Sonic (2006), Sonic Unleashed, Shadow the Hedgehog. Just because Mario had bad games doesn't mean he's now bad, it just means he's had bad games! Plus let's admit it here, SEGA got themselves in the third party business because they used to have their own consoles as you all know.

However before that, Sega spent nearly thousands of money on crappy add-ons to increase the Genesis life-span which never happened because they were fastly made with no real effort. One final note, those silly party games as you call them are there to bring families to TOGETHER! Yeah, that's a stupid thing to do!

Your response is a defensive one, there was no offense intended in my original post. Apologies if you felt that way. I acknowledge full well that Mario coined a lot of what would become standardised in the platforming genre, and was a massively key title in gaming history. But the last influence the brand has had in the industry was in 1997 with Super Mario 64, and while Sonic may not have made such industry ripples in it's lifetime, it has made massive waves including having the first fan-run convention (And indeed the first convention for a singular game character) in the world - a tradition that hits it's fifth year in 2012. To be fair my post in itself was a defensive response to Serum, whose opinions on the matter are his own but frankly childish and without basis in fact. So I am just as guilty as you of that blunder.

Personally, I more than acknowledge SEGA's crummy past. I mean their lawyers were so dumb that in 2002/2003 they signed away the Merchandise Rights to Sonic to Fox Kids BY ACCIDENT. That's why until recently there has been no Sonic merchandise that wasn't directly related to the crappy Sonic X series (Such legislation had lifespan date of when they approximated the influence of Sonic X would last). And yes, the Saturn was a piece of technical genius but SEGA should have held it off for one more year to make it developer-friendly. Sony wouldn't have then stood a chance. As it happened, Saturn was briefly the developer favourite (due to the SEGA brand) until they realised it was a massive headache to actually make games for and and then jumped ship to the far simpler-to-use Sony Playstation. If the Saturn had lasted better, the Dreamcast (Which was actually comparatively successful) would have survived - however the devastation of the companies finances FORCED the end of a strong console early. The games you mention (Sonic 06, Sonic Unleashed, Shadow the Hedgehog) were all, as you say, a massive disappointment.

However Sonic Colors and Generations show a massive turn for the better. Colors especially. Another issue for SEGA is that the Saturn has a good amount of Triple-A titles that it's worth anyone's time playing, especially in the RPG department. However the way the Saturn worked is even more complex than modern machines, because SEGA attempted to increase the flexibility of polygons to create more stylised and detailed graphics (Which is why the Saturn was the first home console with a dual-core processor). This was all done on-board via hardware, so to emulate the games you need to emulate the hardware (Same reason why Xbox 360 can't do all Xbox games, and why the PS3 can't do PS2 games - hardware is very difficult to emulate) OR go back and re-process the original raw game data - most of which has been lost in time. This makes it very difficult for SEGA to release these classics now or in the future (Sonic CD had the exact same issue, which has now been resolved by literally rebuilding the engine from scratch rather than emulate the original game ROM).

As for the crappy add-ons. I own most of them, including the much-expensive Aiwa CSD-G1M (An Aiwa Boombox from Japan with a built in Mega-Drive/Genesis and Mega-CD - yeah it went THAT absurd). And yes, most were silly and stupid, a couple were great but far too pricey. These all took from costs which didn't need to be taken from. The development of Saturn was strange too, with the Neptune and Titan-Video all under construction simultaneously, such three-way working only helped muddy the development of that machine. (Just an FYI, the Neptune never got released and was a Cartridge-based 32bit system intended as a legacy console and a backup if the Saturn should fail and the Titan-Video was released and was an arcade board based on Sega Saturn technology). But I think what didn't help Saturn and Dreamcast were the many variations which have always baffled me cos they're basically the same machine with a different outside colour (So shit variations, as I call them). The only exception was the Hitachi Hi-Saturn Navi, which was a Sega Saturn home console AND one of the first ever Satellite Navigation systems - and yes, that is also mental since home consoles generally don't go travelling with you. And the Dreamcast's exception is the CX-2000 Divers which was a Dreamcast built into a blue CRT TV which had lights which moved and danced to music playing on the console itself.

So these are acknowledged. Sega made mistakes - a shed load. These are majoritively bad moves, and terrible. Difference between SEGA and Nintendo, is that SEGA are known for these bad moves whereas Nintendo fans try to cover up Nintendo's mistakes as good ideas somewhere down the line (Despite the fact that most of these weird things SEGA has done can be put to being good ideas somewhere down the line - fact is they weren't at the end of the day). I'm just calling facts. Should you wish to pull me up on SEGA history, I can recite you much. I'm quite learned in this area. Some of it's stupidly hilarious. But do bear in mind Nintendo were almost forced third-party too during the same era that took down SEGA - GameCube was utterly destroyed by the Playstation 2, as was the Xbox. In fact, the PS2 is the one single successful console of that era, the only reason the Xbox survived was the mass pumping of money by it's rich parent company, and the only reason Nintendo survived (barely) was the fact that the Gamecube was the only console being sold at more than it cost to build each unit. DC, PS2 and Xbox all cost more than the console's sale price, the GC cost less. Ninty took that logic to the Wii development which is why it is so hideously backwards in technology (But the price point in these times is also a good factor for it's financial success).

As for your final note, these 'silly party games' are there to rape money from stupid people who have found a new gadget - a source of people who are dwindling. Nintendo themselves have noted the reduction of purchases (Though the fact Wii is not HD may also be a large contributing factor as HD is now considered a home standard for new technology) which may rise again when WiiU is released, they may not. This remains to be seen. The fact is the 3DS hasn't sold very well compared to estimated targets, because the cheapshow ride Nintendo has been riding on aren't interested in buying a new toy. The Wii and DS is toy enough, they bought once and won't buy again. Which leaves Nintendo hoping it's loyal gamer consumer base will pick up the slack, but there just isn't enough of us compared to non-gamers (Or casual gamers as they're known generally). The WiiU looks like a lacklustre new idea, a Wiimote with a screen. Nintendo have been unsurprisingly tight-lipped about the price of these new units, probably because they will cost more than the current arm-and-a-leg asking price for console controllers. This kind of pricing will alienate the core audience they've been aiming for.

This "bringing families together" idea? It didn't work. It didn't bring families together in the living room. It gave Gran a Brain Training game for the week she played it, it allowed Mum to exercise for two weeks before she got tired of it, it allowed the kids to swing Link's sword and shout "woah!" until they realised the action was identical to pressing a button and as such made "swinging" the sword pointless. Nintendo may be full of ideas, but it's ability to exercise them in reality has always been hit-and-miss. The 64DD, the highly innovative (And brain-destroying) Virtual Boy... and let's not forget their best co-operative effort to bringing CD quality gaming to the SNES - the Playstation. Sega screwed themselves over with bad ideas, yes. But Nintendo screwed over everyone including itself when it decided to firstly work with Sony on the SNES CD Add-On, and then U-Turned on Sony leaving them with an unsaleable machine - thus giving Sony the idea to enter the market with the machine reconditioned as a stand-alone unit and ruining both Nintendo AND SEGA's days. But Nintendo fans always sweep that little mistake under the rug - the whole reason Nintendo nearly bit the dust in the mid-2000s was by creating a monster they couldn't compete with and set about getting battered by them solidly for over a decade. They may have victory now, but I feel it shall be somewhat brief as Nintendo struggle to stay ahead of the 'innovation-curve' that seems to be the developer's favourite in-thing at the moment.

Posted: **Wed Dec 28, 2011 6:12 pm**

Serum wrote:
1upmushroom wrote:Sega spent nearly thousands of money on crappy add-ons to increase the Genesis life-span which never happened because they were fastly made with no real effort.

Nintendo is just as guilty of releasing pointless peripherals for their systems, as well. The "Super GameBoy" and the "Satellaview" were released for the Super Nintendo and the "64DD" was released for the N64 in Japan.

The Super Game Boy was useful for folks who did not want to use the Game Boy system and its batteries at home. As for the Satellaview and the 64DD, they were released only in Japan.

Posted: **Wed Dec 28, 2011 6:26 pm**

Roareye wrote:I can understand believing the Saturn was bad, but the Dreamcast? It literally invented online gaming on home systems - I guess Nintendo fans wouldn't get that though since the Wii online is about as good as a chocolate teapot.

The Dreamcast is certainly a highly underrated system that was truly ahead of its time, but as a Nintendo fan I have to speak up and say that Nintendo has been attempting online connectivity/multiplayer since the original NES. From the Satallaview to the 64DD, Nintendo has tried and sadly failed to incorporate such functions into their system due to no fault of their own. The technology simply wasn't inexpensive enough to produce yet while the market had no interest.

It was when they finally gave up (the GameCube GCN) that Microsoft swung in with their Xbox and hardware familiarity. It was finally possible, but they had already put in too much only to lose it all. Nintendo deserves credit as well.

Posted: **Wed Dec 28, 2011 7:27 pm**

Redstar wrote:
Roareye wrote:I can understand believing the Saturn was bad, but the Dreamcast? It literally invented online gaming on home systems - I guess Nintendo fans wouldn't get that though since the Wii online is about as good as a chocolate teapot.

The Dreamcast is certainly a highly underrated system that was truly ahead of its time, but as a Nintendo fan I have to speak up and say that Nintendo has been attempting online connectivity/multiplayer since the original NES. From the Satallaview to the 64DD, Nintendo has tried and sadly failed to incorporate such functions into their system due to no fault of their own. The technology simply wasn't inexpensive enough to produce yet while the market had no interest.

It was when they finally gave up (the GameCube GCN) that Microsoft swung in with their Xbox and hardware familiarity. It was finally possible, but they had already put in too much only to lose it all. Nintendo deserves credit as well.

Internet connectivity is a difficult success to place upon any one company. SEGA were the first to successfully make it an option available to all it's user base (By including a modem as part of the console as standard, and actually having games utilise this within the first year of it's launch), and Microsoft Xbox were the first to install a permanent user base on it (Because of the rise of broadband and the release of Halo 2). Outside of these, internet availability has been tried on all systems at some point. Though I was a bit harsh when I slandered the Wii's internet capabilities, but the truth is it is an under-achieving online system compared to Sony and Microsoft's offerings.

But yeah, back in the 1980s and all the way through the 1990s it was a solid goal for all companies.
The Commodore Amiga 500+ from 1985, which at the time was powerful enough to almost crush Microsoft (Until Microsoft partnered with IBM) had internet capability (My PC history is poor, I'm guessing PCs had a similar ability).
The NES had a modem too, but in Japan only so can only be found as Famicom Modem.
The Sega Mega Drive/Genesis had two or three variations. In America there was a third party modem called the X-Modem, which allowed for certain games (Such as an NBL game) to be played online between consoles.
The Sega Saturn has a modem internet output for a web browser which never actually got released (Among billions of other concepts for the Saturn not released).
The Nintendo 64DD had internet capability which was little/never utilised.
* The Sega Dreamcast achieved true consumer-wide internet gameplay, especially with killer-app Phantasy Star Online, however 54k Modems made for long load times and infrequent lag.
The Playstation 2 includes internet accessability which is either not used or never utilised to it's full potential.
The Nintendo GameCube includes a modem adapter (Broadband adapter also available) as seperate items. Low games compatible with the device apart from a re-release of Phantasy Star Online lead the online part of GC to fail.
* The Microsoft Xbox comes with internet connectivity as part of the console's core dashboard, and with the introduction of Halo 2 and wider-spread broadband connectivity, successfully establishes a userbase still online today.

From 1983 to 2004 (Halo 2's release) is how long it took for true, continued internet connectivity to be achieved (With a small uprising in 1999 to 2002 through the Dreamcast). It may also be of note that the Dreamcast runs on Windows CE, and is fully compatible with the DOS system of the time. This makes it very easy to utilise the Dreamcast as an emulation device for any prior console that can be emulated on a Windows PC. Also may be worthy of note that the then-head of SEGA was planning on working solely with Microsoft when they discovered the company had to go third-party, as the Xbox was originally being built as a strange way of Microsoft keeping SEGA in the industry (While trying to make a great little earner on the side). However the guy in charge actually died (Of natural causes) prior to a meeting with the chaps at Microsoft and his plan to work solely with Microsoft was never realised - however classic titles such as Panzer Dragoon Orta, Shenmue II and Jet Set Radio Future made their way as exclusives onto the Microsoft system and have never even been re-released again since. It took another year before SEGA got their act together with Nintendo and began releasing Super Monkey Ball, Sonic Adventure 2 Battle and began working on F-Zero GX for release on their ex-rival's hardware. This may have been partly due to SEGA's rise with developers over Nintendo in the late 80s/early 90s due to Nintendo's bullying and entrapment tactics with developers - effectively bullying developers into exclusive releases or face not being able to release anything on their NES (Which was the most popular console of it's time). Nintendo has since relinquished this somewhat inethical and medieval way of working.

But yeah, all of the trivia aside, the truth is that many companies deserve some form of credit. Nintendo were the first (With the 64DD) to offer a dev-style machine with internet connectivity, Sega were the first to offer it to it's entire consumer base, and Microsoft were the first to truly put together a solid and long-lasting system. Sony have made great strides, but it's blunder in security earlier this year are going to be a bit of a dark spot for it for some time to come. It's gonna be difficult to pin down which company started internet strides first. Nintendo and Commodore both seem to be the earliest adopters to my knowledge. Surprisingly enough (Cos I thought the SEGA SG-1000/SC-3000 had an adaptor but it didn't - surprising since it had an add-on for everything else in the known universe, like answer phone, fax machine, printer, tape recorder...), looking at release dates in Japan, both the SEGA SG-1000 and Nintendo Entertainment System (NES) were both released on the same day! July 15th 1983. Having said that, the NES didn't have internet connectivity as early as the Commodore Amiga. After doing some research, which led me to my findings on no modem for SEGA SG/SC, I also found the release date for the Famicom Modem (Released in Japan only) was 1988 so many other companies employed it first however it's the earliest date I can find of a console-specific company taking on the feature. So, unless I can find anything else it would seem Nintendo were the first to try it, Sega were the first to succeed with it and Microsoft were the first to make a profit out of it. And Sony were the first to get hacked from it XD

Posted: **Thu Dec 29, 2011 4:44 am**

Roareye wrote:But Sonic and Mario never think alike. If they did, a cross-over platforming game would have been done years ago due to it's simplicity. But because of the difference between their focuses and playing styles would mean a cross-over would be possible, but would be a minefield to blend together well.

I disagree.

Posted: **Thu Dec 29, 2011 6:18 am**

LBD_Nytetrayn wrote:
Roareye wrote:But Sonic and Mario never think alike. If they did, a cross-over platforming game would have been done years ago due to it's simplicity. But because of the difference between their focuses and playing styles would mean a cross-over would be possible, but would be a minefield to blend together well.

I disagree.

Pie in the sky, mate.

The difference between a "I think this would be the best mix" by a fan/journalist and the logistics of actually creating a game that is both loyal and satisfactory to both is astronomical.

Firstly gameplay mechanics are very different. Mario levels in a Generations engine would be problematic as the engine isn't really designed for slower paced gameplay (Play Generations and move around slowly and you'll see what I mean). It is solely designed for speed - something that isn't Mario at it's core.

Another thing is say the Generations engine CAN be bent to match Mario style gameplay (It is theoretically plausible), then how do you think Nintendo fans will feel about SEGA having almost total control of Mario's gameplay mechanics. The likelihood is if the engine is owned by SEGA, they aren't going to want Nintendo nosing around their home-made Hedgehog Engine even if they sent over Shigsy himself. The alternative is for Nintendo to develop a Sonic based engine, something I am 100% certain they are incapable of doing - Nintendo just lacks the style required.

The biggest blockade to all of this is the usual. Legal. Legal bull is the core niggle EVERY developer faces. Neither SEGA nor Nintendo is going to be cavalier about the deployment of their mascots, especially a more key platforming role between the two. Nintendo and SEGA only just agreed for their mascots to appear together in games which were in a sports realm completely disconnected from their respective series. Several concepts for Dream Events in the Olympics series have not been implemented simply because either Nintendo or SEGA didn't feel it would be fair or match the style of their mascots, some were also declined by the Olympics committee too. I'm not certain of the legal process for approving ideas to use Mario in through Nintendo, but I imagine it is somewhat similar to SEGA. SEGA have a Sonic Council in Sega of Japan (SoJ), which must approve any idea utilising the blue hero. Ideas must be approved by the Sonic Council, SoJ themselves, then also Sega of America (SoA) or Sega of Europe (SoE) if either two are involved in the production at all.

A key example of this is Sega Superstars Tennis - a videogame made in the UK by an independent company called Sumo Digital. SEGA worked with Sumo Digital to great success in porting the famous Outrun 2 and Virtua Tennis series to consoles, so when Sumo approached SoE with the concept of making an All-Stars game it had to be approached carefully. Ideas for possible characters had to be drafted up, then sent to SoE for approval. Once SoE approved the listings, they were sent to SoJ for approval. Once SoJ approved the list, it was sent to the Sonic Council for their approval. This took at least a month to go through the line. Sonic Council then did not give their approval. For the first few months, Sonic was not able to be put into the game at all! Oddly enough, Amy and Shadow were considered acceptable to be put into the game but Sonic was not allowed. Sumo Digital had to make a few changes and different approaches for Sonic Council to give their approval - but they had to resubmit the exact same way as before. This is for a game featuring only SEGA characters to a trusted and employed game company through SoE. Because of the length of time it took legal to work things through, the final character selection was cut in half and the brief storyline that had been written for the game had to be removed as SoJ didn't approve.

Now imagine the complex process SEGA's legal would go through in a collaborative effort with an external company mixed with the similar response from Nintendo.

I think the practicality of bringing these two icons together in a truly joint adventure is more impossible not so much due to gameplay, but because of legal migraine.

Posted: **Thu Dec 29, 2011 4:15 pm**

Roareye wrote:
LBD_Nytetrayn wrote:
Roareye wrote:But Sonic and Mario never think alike. If they did, a cross-over platforming game would have been done years ago due to it's simplicity. But because of the difference between their focuses and playing styles would mean a cross-over would be possible, but would be a minefield to blend together well.

I disagree.

Pie in the sky, mate.

The difference between a "I think this would be the best mix" by a fan/journalist and the logistics of actually creating a game that is both loyal and satisfactory to both is astronomical.

Looking back at the original quote, I think I misread it slightly (yay, late-night posting). Without going into everything, I agree that legal and logistics and such would be the biggest obstacle. I just think that, from a technical standpoint, there is a way to combine the two worlds without having to worry about Mario or Sonic dealing with stages irrespective of their normal speeds and flow.

Posted: **Thu Dec 29, 2011 6:11 pm**

There is no more "Nintendo Versus Sega," anymore. They're the same company now, remember? After the failure of the Dreamcast, they went bankrupt and Nintendo bailed them out in exchange for overtaking their company, programmers and business in general and and making Sonic a Nintendo character. Once upon a time, it was said that "Sega does what Nintendon't," but now it's the other way around: Nintendoes what Segan't.

Posted: **Thu Dec 29, 2011 8:46 pm**

Serum wrote:There is no more "Nintendo Versus Sega," anymore. They're the same company now, remember? After the failure of the Dreamcast, they went bankrupt and Nintendo bailed them out in exchange for overtaking their company, programmers and business in general and and making Sonic a Nintendo character. Once upon a time, it was said that "Sega does what Nintendon't," but now it's the other way around: Nintendoes what Segan't.

Except that is totally false. Nintendo decided NOT to assist SEGA with getting out of financial difficulty.

Please at least look at facts before regurgitating lies. Sammy, the Japanese Pachinko Machine company, bought out the rights to SEGA and now SEGA is the strongest selling leg of that particular firm. Sammy owns SEGa if anybody, Nintendo owns diddly-squat. If Nintendo bailed out SEGA and now owned them (An event that NEVER occured, in fact Microsoft was going to be in ownership of the company before the then-SEGA President died) why do SEGA and Sonic games appear on other systems? The fact of the matter is that SEGA are not owned in any minor or major part by Nintendo. They never have been and likely never will be.

Also how is Sonic a Nintendo property? Is it because of his appearance in Smash Bros Brawl? If that's the case, then SEGA own ALL rights to F-Zero after solely developing both F-Zero GX and F-Zero AX. You'll find that business does not operate in this twisted manner. The use of Sonic in Smash Bros, and the use of the F-Zero name in AX/GX is all to do with cross-party licensing and legal stuff. It doesn't mean that any rights to those characters are exchanged in any way. SEGA own only the rights to the soundtrack and game of F-Zero they created, but cannot choose to make a sequel without Nintendo's consent. Any Smash Bros sequel would also require SEGA's approval to have Sonic in it, otherwise Nintendo could and would be sued for illegal use of another company's product.

As for Nintendoes what Segan't, which is a shit reworking of the original slogan, Nintendo can't seem to achieve as wide a range of properties outside of party games. SEGA achieve this with Mario and Sonic, and yet still manage to develop games across other consoles such as Yakuza, Sega Rally, Sega Allstars Racing, Superstars Tennis/Virtua Tennis, Outrun, Bayonetta, Madworld... the list goes on. This arguing of ridiculous American slogans is annoying, because let's face it - American advertising for the Genesis was never half as good as the European Mega Drive Ads of Cyber Razor Cut.

I really don't understand your beef with SEGA, Serum. You say you feel SEGA betrayed you, but they've only ever acted as their own entity outside of Nintendo, so that makes no sense. And you also spread false information about SEGA's ownership which is not in any way controlled by Nintendo.

As for SEGA making consoles again, even when they "aren't" at the moment, there was the Panzer Dragoon Orta Xbox, and more recently the Yakuza 3 PS3 machines. However development of a new machine is difficult for any company.
Where would such a console fit in the market? The Xbox controls the majority of online play, the PS3 has media streaming down pat and the Wii controls the majority of casual and innovation-based gameplay. SEGA's only card that would stand out from the crowd is their Arcade heritage which in the modern age wouldn't be enough to beat the competition. Playing the Arcade at home was an 80s and early 90s thing, nowadays it's not such a major grab.

Posted: **Thu Dec 29, 2011 8:48 pm**

Roareye wrote:[Except that is totally false. Nintendo decided NOT to assist SEGA with getting out of financial difficulty.

Sonic is in Nintendo games, now. Sega is Nintendo. There will not be a new system from what used to be Sega. This conversation can serve no further purpose. Nor did it serve any purpose to begin with.

Posted: **Thu Dec 29, 2011 9:13 pm**

Serum wrote:
Roareye wrote:[Except that is totally false. Nintendo decided NOT to assist SEGA with getting out of financial difficulty.

Sonic is in Nintendo games, now. Sega is Nintendo. There will not be a new system from what used to be Sega. This conversation can serve no further purpose. Nor did it serve any purpose to begin with.

Your inability to understand the difference between fact and fiction is baffling, but if you are unwilling to see the truth in this matter, it is no longer worth pursuing.

Mario and F-Zero are now owned by SEGA, and Donkey Kong is now owned by Microsoft (As it was developed by Rare, who are owned by Microsoft), Konami now own Mario too as they made a Dance Dance Revolution game with him in it.

Thanks for showing me the light. It's a government conspiracy! Secretly they are all one collective whole company, and they are duping us all with their consumer-terrorism. It's like 9/11 in a jar.

Posted: **Thu Dec 29, 2011 9:18 pm**

Roareye wrote:
Serum wrote:
Roareye wrote:[Except that is totally false. Nintendo decided NOT to assist SEGA with getting out of financial difficulty.

Sonic is in Nintendo games, now. Sega is Nintendo. There will not be a new system from what used to be Sega. This conversation can serve no further purpose. Nor did it serve any purpose to begin with.

Your inability to understand the difference between fact and fiction is baffling, but if you are unwilling to see the truth in this matter, it is no longer worth pursuing.

Mario and F-Zero are now owned by SEGA, and Donkey Kong is now owned by Microsoft (As it was developed by Rare, who are owned by Microsoft), Konami now own Mario too as they made a Dance Dance Revolution game with him in it.

Thanks for showing me the light. It's a government conspiracy! Secretly they are all one collective whole company, and they are duping us all with their consumer-terrorism. It's like 9/11 in a jar.

That or you're BOTH psychoes!

Posted: **Sat Dec 31, 2011 4:43 am**

*walks into discussion*

*looks around*

*walks right back out*

Posted: **Thu May 17, 2012 11:08 am**

Also, why HAVE people compared Sonic with Mario anyway? I mean it may seem cool at first but logically it doesn't make much sense. Both are platformers, and both have reconizable characters but that's it. Mario was about jumping and taking time. Sonic was about speed and not losing momentum!

Sonic has always had voice acting ever since the first 3D game according to my knowledge. However Mario has only had voice acting (and I don't mean simple voice clips like Mario 64 I mean full voice acting from beginning to end) for one game (three if you count Hotel Mario and Mario Teaches Typing).

Mario was more similar to fantasy, Sonic was more grounded in science fiction. Mario took on lots of creatures and little machines, wheras Sonic took on lots of machines and little monsters. The world of Mario was always had some sort of mythical fantasy feel to it, the world of Sonic had a more tropical feel to it.

To add more to the pile, Mario's main rival was a creature bent on marrying a princess, Sonic's main foe was a mad scientist bent on rulling the world (Bowser would often include world conquest in his schemes from time to time but he was mostly interested in the Princess). The heroes of Sonic were mostly creatures, the heroes of Mario were human.

If you really think about it, these games are almost nothing alike. They're both platformers, they both have yellow objects you can collect. Both heroes have doppelgangers, butm ost of these simlarities are normal for platformers. Other Sonic and Mario are completelty different franchises not worth comparing to. But that's my opinion.

Posted: **Fri May 18, 2012 4:21 pm**

1upmushroom wrote:Also, why HAVE people compared Sonic with Mario anyway? I mean it may seem cool at first but logically it doesn't make much sense. Both are platformers, and both have reconizable characters but that's it. Mario was about jumping and taking time. Sonic was about speed and not losing momentum!

The two characters/properties are compared because Sega made a point to declare Mario "old school" while Sonic was something more fast-paced and exciting for a new generation of kids. They specifically designed the character to be the antithesis of Mario, which really worked for its time and helped to carry the Genesis system.

Posted: **Fri May 18, 2012 4:23 pm**

I like sonic, but I under stand the levels can get frustrating.
If you want a more balanced sonic game try sonic colors on Wii.

Posted: **Fri May 18, 2012 8:49 pm**

Redstar wrote:The two characters/properties are compared because Sega made a point to declare Mario "old school" while Sonic was something more fast-paced and exciting for a new generation of kids.

I get why they were compared THEN, but now it's kind of like comparing apples to oranges. It's like if I compared Zelda to Minecraft, it just seems so random. The Sonic series should be recognized as a thing of it's own without having to be compared to Mario, a game series that's almost nothing like Sonic. SEGA obviously knew this since the "old school" propaganda isn't seen anymore, at least I haven't seen it.

All I'm really trying to say though is that the debate over which is better is kind of pointless now.

Posted: **Sat Jul 07, 2012 9:37 pm**

What boggles my mind is when people interpret Mario and Sonic THEMSELVES as "bitter rivals" when the only time they've met in canon is in Smash bros and the Olympic Games.

I run this Ask Mario blog on tumblr, and I STILL get questions about him and Sonic being bitter rivals to point where I just kinda had enough and posted this response: http://plumber-extraordinare.tumblr.com ... -anons-are

Like, okay, I understand back in the day Nintendo and Sega were competitive and whatnot, but it wasn't the CHARACTERS that had the feud, it was the companies. Narratively speaking, I see absolutely NO other reason for Mario and Sonic to even dislike each other, much less be anything worse than competitive rivals in sports.

Then again, I'm the kind of person that overthinks characters and their personalities and interactions (hence why I run a character blog in the first place lawl), so yeah.

Posted: **Sat Jul 07, 2012 11:19 pm**

What really makes me wonder is why this "feud" is still going among fans. Nintendo's barely surviving and Sega's now a third party developer. Plus, sega's now produced games on Nintendo consoles and...oh yeah did I forget to mention that Nintendo used Sonic in Smash Bros, one of their most popular Nintendo Exclusive games?!

It bothers me to no end.

Posted: **Sat Jul 07, 2012 11:43 pm**

1upmushroom wrote:What really makes me wonder is why this "feud" is still going among fans. Nintendo's barely surviving and Sega's now a third party developer. Plus, sega's now produced games on Nintendo consoles and...oh yeah did I forget to mention that Nintendo used Sonic in Smash Bros, one of their most popular Nintendo Exclusive games?!

It bothers me to no end.

I wouldn't say Nintendo is struggling. They hurt themselves with the 3DS marketing it completely wrong. I think they are doing just fine, especially in Japan. It's just here in the states all people want is Call of Duty. I just don't know why or will I ever understand the obsession of that game.

Posted: **Sat Jul 07, 2012 11:57 pm**

Yeah, it sucks that Call of Duty is now the dominating game in America.

Posted: **Sun Jul 08, 2012 2:12 am**

nintendonut1 wrote:What boggles my mind is when people interpret Mario and Sonic THEMSELVES as "bitter rivals" when the only time they've met in canon is in Smash bros and the Olympic Games.

Which is a shame as the two companies could very easily come together and make an excellent game featuring both characters in a game more suited to their individual genres. I'm sure they could easily innovate scenarios where Mario has to run quickly while Sonic must take his time and jump.

The rivalry is nonexistant, but the nostalgia for it surely is.

Posted: **Sat Jul 21, 2012 3:25 am**

Redstar wrote:
nintendonut1 wrote:What boggles my mind is when people interpret Mario and Sonic THEMSELVES as "bitter rivals" when the only time they've met in canon is in Smash bros and the Olympic Games.

Which is a shame as the two companies could very easily come together and make an excellent game featuring both characters in a game more suited to their individual genres. I'm sure they could easily innovate scenarios where Mario has to run quickly while Sonic must take his time and jump.

The rivalry is nonexistant, but the nostalgia for it surely is.

Or just mimic Sonic Generations, but with Mario in place of one of the Sonics. i.e. set half of a stage up in a way which makes sense for Mario to traverse, and the other for Sonic. Throw in some mixed power-ups (Speed Shoes for Mario! Fire Flowers for Sonic!) and foes, and let the good times roll!

Though, for what you said, those could be neat "challenge" stages. Ironically, Sonic's platforming used to be a lot slower paced at points, but not so much in the newer titles.

Posted: **Sun Aug 05, 2012 9:12 pm**

I wish Sega would grow a set and make a good Sonic Game. Make Sonic Adventure's 3. I would LOVE to play that. And yes the more recent games are Bad. Sonic Generations wasn't bad. But it was the equivalent of a band's Greatest Hits Album. It's Sonic Greatest Levels. That's really all it is.

But the Unique thing was they gave it it's own story. Which is Great. Sonic The Hedgehog 4 Episode 1 was just a Novelty Item. It's literally Same Sonic, Different Graphics. So don't call it Sonic 4. 4 implies it's a different game. When it's not. It's the old game but revamped. I'm not saying it's bad. But it's NOT a new Sonic game. Sonic colors was GREAT! Easily an 8.5 Sonic Rivals wasn't bad. It was it's own unique racing game. But it's so much better with 2 players and I knew no one else that had it. Let alone a PSP.

But all these other Sonic Racing Games...again feels like a novelty item. Sonic Riders was hard as hell. But it has been re-released on the wii as Sonic Riders Zero Gravity. I havent played that yet. PLEASE SEGA!!! GROW A SET!!!

Posted: **Sun Aug 05, 2012 9:25 pm**

Sega's dead, dude. So is Atari. They've both been absorbed by the three major players-- Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony. Which is a shame-- I've always been a big supporter of Atari. Sega, eh, not so much, but Atari pretty much created the video-game as we know it today and deserves to be still be making systems.

Posted: **Sun Aug 05, 2012 9:31 pm**

Sega SYSTEMS are dead. They still make video games. But either way Sonic is my childhood hero. And Nintendo is just sh!tting all over him. Sonic can be an amazing asset to Nintendo but they just turned him into a Novelty.

Posted: **Sun Aug 05, 2012 9:58 pm**

IbanezJFS wrote:Sega SYSTEMS are dead. They still make video games. But either way Sonic is my childhood hero. And Nintendo is just sh!tting all over him. Sonic can be an amazing asset to Nintendo but they just turned him into a Novelty.

If a company that once made major consoles for video-games to played on doesn't make consoles anymore, it's dead. The "Sega" label might as well just read "Nintendo," now.

As for Atari... well, the Jaguar was their undoing, which is unfortunate because I loved that thing.

Posted: **Mon Aug 06, 2012 12:10 am**

That ET game didn't help either.

Posted: **Mon Aug 06, 2012 12:16 am**

The only Sonic game I ever got into was Mario & Sonic at the Olympic Games. It's a fun and interactive game that has actually gotten my hard thumping. Especially in the aquatics and athletics. I have a friend who is a big fan of the franchise though. I should hop over to his house and get my Sonic on! I'm a track & cross country runner so the speed is intriguing! Haha

Posted: **Mon Aug 06, 2012 1:13 am**

IbanezJFS wrote:That ET game didn't help either.

They promptly admitted they were wrong and did what any sensible human being would do in that situation-- procede to round up every unsold copy of that game and bury it in the middle of the desert.

Posted: **Mon Aug 06, 2012 1:41 am**

Serum wrote:
IbanezJFS wrote:Sega SYSTEMS are dead. They still make video games. But either way Sonic is my childhood hero. And Nintendo is just sh!tting all over him. Sonic can be an amazing asset to Nintendo but they just turned him into a Novelty.

If a company that once made major consoles for video-games to played on doesn't make consoles anymore, it's dead. The "Sega" label might as well just read "Nintendo," now.

You keep pushing this point, Serum, yet you also neglect to realize that SEGA makes titles for systems by publishers other than Nintendo.

Posted: **Mon Aug 06, 2012 5:14 am**

Eh, we're getting off topic...

My bad.

Posted: **Tue Aug 07, 2012 1:57 pm**

IbanezJFS wrote:I wish Sega would grow a set and make a good Sonic Game. Make Sonic Adventure's 3. I would LOVE to play that. And yes the more recent games are Bad. Sonic Generations wasn't bad. But it was the equivalent of a band's Greatest Hits Album. It's Sonic Greatest Levels. That's really all it is.

But the Unique thing was they gave it it's own story. Which is Great. Sonic The Hedgehog 4 Episode 1 was just a Novelty Item. It's literally Same Sonic, Different Graphics. So don't call it Sonic 4. 4 implies it's a different game. When it's not. It's the old game but revamped. I'm not saying it's bad. But it's NOT a new Sonic game. Sonic colors was GREAT! Easily an 8.5 Sonic Rivals wasn't bad. It was it's own unique racing game. But it's so much better with 2 players and I knew no one else that had it. Let alone a PSP.

But all these other Sonic Racing Games...again feels like a novelty item. Sonic Riders was hard as hell. But it has been re-released on the wii as Sonic Riders Zero Gravity. I havent played that yet. PLEASE SEGA!!! GROW A SET!!!

SEGA are doing more than most other companies. They are currently on a bit of a downturn, but they are pushing back the release date and pumping more money into Alien: Colonial Marines - hopefully that will be incredible.

Sonic Generations was good, but Sonic Colors was superb. Not to mention Valkyria Chronicles, Yakuza 4, Bayonetta... many of the top games in their respective genres come from SEGA, it just seems to be people equate Sonic games to being ALL SEGA puts out. SEGA puts out many works, might be worth your time to actually look at what games they make before slandering their output.

Serum wrote:Sega's dead, dude. So is Atari. They've both been absorbed by the three major players-- Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony. Which is a shame-- I've always been a big supporter of Atari. Sega, eh, not so much, but Atari pretty much created the video-game as we know it today and deserves to be still be making systems.

Your opinion is not only total crap, but ridiculously childish. As someone who works with SEGA, and knows how up-front and respectful they are in their communication, it is somewhat offensive to see you write such puerile tosh. SEGA are their own third-party company. Going third-party does not make you "absorbed" in any way - you're thinking of "Second-Party" like Rare is to Nintendo/Microsoft or Bungie were to Microsoft, or Retro Studios are to Nintendo. They are part-owned by the console manufacturers and as such they aren't able to make games for competitor's machines. SEGA makes most of it's games on PS3 and XBOX 360, with several exclusives for Wii. How can any company that builds for all three (Not to mention mobile phones and handhelds) be owned by any of them? Is EA owned by the big three? Is Activision or Rockstar? Valve? Christ the list is endless.

Atari died with EVERYONE back in 1982/83 with the massive console collapse. There were about 25 competing home-consoles all at once, that sort of over-saturation killed the market and would do again if repeated. SEGA, despite making the SG-1000 in 1981, was the only surviving player, with the SG-1000 Mark III in 1984 picking them back from the ground and giving them an advantage until Nintendo's NES in 1985. Surprising as it may be, SEGA were on the home console scene before Nintendo and survived the crash that Nintendo avoided (As they only made Game & Watch, Arcade machines and playing cards) altogether. SEGA survived on the strength of it's arcade cabinets, as did Atari, but Atari failed to build another home console that could compete with the NES. The SG-1000 Mk III (Redesigned and named the Master System) actually achieved success in Brazil and Europe, where the NES was too expensive and less powerful, which gave SEGA the initiative to bring the noise for the Mega Drive/Genesis in 1989.

Do bear in mind in the arcade industry, SEGA led the technical way during the 80s. SEGA were the first company who were able to make a game with continuous background music by developing the chip capable of handling it. Prior chips burnt out in 4 days if they played music constantly, which is why sound effects and the odd jingle were all you used to get. SEGA also were one of the first companies to employ online gaming (Sega Mega Drive/Genesis) and then the first to employ it out of the box and as a mainstream gaming function (Dreamcast). Even after ducking out of the console market, they have developed revolutionary face-mapping technology in the Yakuza series, developed new surface engines in Sega Rally Revo and built new standards of audio excellence by winning awards for 5.1 surround sound music soundtracks (most game soundtracks are stereo and only the sound effects are in surround sound).

Aliens: Colonial Marines - the game they are funding to try and pull their company back into a state of growth, is on XBOX 360, PC and PS3 btw, no Nintendo Wii. If they were really 'owned' by Nintendo, then surely their biggest game of the year would be coming out on Nintendo's system?

Think a bit before you bullshaft.

Posted: **Tue Aug 07, 2012 3:31 pm**

Settle down, Beavis.

I'm not really a video-gamer. To me, the main men of video-games were the early days of Nintendo, Atari and the guys at Id Software. Other than that, I really don't play anything.

A place for those who "Trust the Fungus"

Mario vs. Sonic, or: Nintendo vs. Sega

Mario vs. Sonic, or: Nintendo vs. Sega

Re: Mario vs. Sonic, or: Do Great Minds Think Alike?

Re: Mario vs. Sonic, or: Do Great Minds Think Alike?

Re: Mario vs. Sonic, or: Do Great Minds Think Alike?

Re: Mario vs. Sonic, or: Do Great Minds Think Alike?

Re: Mario vs. Sonic, or: Do Great Minds Think Alike?

Re: Mario vs. Sonic, or: Do Great Minds Think Alike?

Re: Mario vs. Sonic, or: Do Great Minds Think Alike?

Re: Mario vs. Sonic, or: Do Great Minds Think Alike?

Re: Mario vs. Sonic, or: Do Great Minds Think Alike?

Re: Mario vs. Sonic, or: Do Great Minds Think Alike?

Re: Mario vs. Sonic, or: Do Great Minds Think Alike?

Re: Mario vs. Sonic, or: Do Great Minds Think Alike?

Re: Mario vs. Sonic, or: Nintendo vs. Sega

Re: Mario vs. Sonic, or: Nintendo vs. Sega

Re: Mario vs. Sonic, or: Nintendo vs. Sega

Re: Mario vs. Sonic, or: Nintendo vs. Sega

Re: Mario vs. Sonic, or: Nintendo vs. Sega

Re: Mario vs. Sonic, or: Nintendo vs. Sega

Re: Mario vs. Sonic, or: Nintendo vs. Sega

Re: Mario vs. Sonic, or: Nintendo vs. Sega

Re: Mario vs. Sonic, or: Nintendo vs. Sega

Re: Mario vs. Sonic, or: Nintendo vs. Sega

Re: Mario vs. Sonic, or: Nintendo vs. Sega

Re: Mario vs. Sonic, or: Nintendo vs. Sega

Re: Mario vs. Sonic, or: Nintendo vs. Sega

Re: Mario vs. Sonic, or: Nintendo vs. Sega

Re: Mario vs. Sonic, or: Nintendo vs. Sega

Re: Mario vs. Sonic, or: Nintendo vs. Sega

Re: Sonic the Hedgehog

Re: Sonic the Hedgehog

Re: Sonic the Hedgehog

Re: Sonic the Hedgehog

Re: Sonic the Hedgehog

Re: Sonic the Hedgehog

Re: Sonic the Hedgehog

Re: Sonic the Hedgehog

Re: Sonic the Hedgehog

Re: Sonic the Hedgehog

Re: Sonic the Hedgehog