Two words: Sonic Rush. I think ATM it's my favorite DS game.

My point was that Sonic's had it rough, but Mario hasn't been smelling like roses for the past couple years anyway (even if I was madly in love with Sunshine). I just think Mario gets more overall love and a free status boost because his company is still making consoles.

Joe: Wow, that had to be tough supporting the TG-16 in the midst of the SNES/Genesis war. I don't know anyone who was interested in it, much less could afford it ($400 for the CD add-on!) If only NEC understood the console market better, it could have done so much better. The graphics still look pretty sharp nowadays.

Aside from the Luigi's Mansion part, I completely agree with the above.  SM64 doesn't stand up well these days.  It was revolutionary and great at the time, but it's not much fun to go back to.  Sunshine was really refreshing, and I agree with Ryu that it's the overall better game of the two, even with the hideous Pianta character designs.

I also agree with Ryu that Klonoa needs to come back with another sweet 2.5D romp and that the GBA ones were rubbish (why they changed the gameplay completey to a weird Action/Puzzle hybrid is beyond me).

Additionally, every 3D Sonic game I've played has been complete garbage, and I've played all of them except the last two, one of which was universally panned and while the other received mixed reviews.

The stuff I read said that the game is being developed by the team that makes Sega's Japanese-developed sports games.  I've never found a olympic game I actually liked, so I don't really have much interest in this title, but at least this announcement more or less guarantees that Sonic will be in SSBB.

That and the fact that even his dodgier games (personally I felt the camera in Sunshine was atrocious and it hindered gameplay) aren't a total insult to gaming. Poor old Sonic can't say the same. Sonic Rush is only decent by comparison with the 3D Sonics (and yet still has unflagged pits of doom and 'hold right til you reach the end' gameplay meaning it would never stand up against the classic Sonic games) and is put to shame by New Super Mario Bros which, even with it's ease and baffling structure, retained much of the gameplay that makes Mario a classic.

I think one huge difference between modern Sonic and modern Mario is that Nintendo seem to have some idea of what made classic Marios great and is attempting (with varying degrees of success) to retain that. Sega, on the other hand, are flapping about like a dying fish with no clue as to what was good about Sonic to begin with.

People (especially Sega) seem to forget just how well designed those early Sonic games were. You wouldn't survive a minute in Sonic 1, 2 or 3 by just holding right. The levels went up, around, in and out of places. It wasn't a bad 2D race-style gameplay. It was full-on platforming. Speed in the early Sonics, though fun, would kill. Yet people think of Sonic and all they remember is running through those loops. Then they wonder why the modern Sonics just aren't as good.

Eh...I've probably died a considerable amount of times in Rush the instant I get content with "just holding right" so I really disagree there (I don't disagree about the pitfalls though). I'm really enjoying everything about the game, from the boss battles to the level designs to the controls to how the dual screens are simply used to increase the playing field. The 2.5D perspective for the bosses is cool too...I wish the rest of the game would have used that in various ways. If I had to, I'd say it's second to Sonic 2 in terms of the 2D Sonics (and even then, I haven't quite finished it...That's just based on the first 4 levels with Sonic).

I really don't have a bad thing to say about New Super Mario Brothers, aside from the fact the controls could be a bit more tighter and it was a long time in the making. Oh yeah...and the new size mushrooms were really poorly implemented.

*shrug* Neither Mario or Sonic are perfect, but they do have plenty of historical value and their games nowadays are still ahead of the curve, I think. As for "an insult to gaming"...I think the whole collect-a-thon ethic of 3D platformers is far more of one (which the 3D Marios semi fall into, hence why I say they aren't that much fun to me) than crimes against gaming the 3D Sonics (which aren't collect-a-thons, thankfully) have committed.

Well we're not going to agree on most of the Sonics (especially given that you think Rush is second only to Sonic 2) but have you played 360 Sonic? Not even close to 'ahead of the curve'. In fact, I believe if that game didn't have the Sonic brand, it would barely have sold ten copies and rightfully so. I think Sonic is selling more games on brand awareness and few (if any) of the recent games are 'ahead of the curve'. If Sonic Heroes had been about some later game characters, like Crash Bandicoot or something, it would have been exposed for the broken game it is much quicker. There are much better games out there these days. They're like Star Wars games - a certain amount of SW fans will buy them no matter how bad they get.

But you're right about historical value. As ass-raped as Sonic is these days, it should never be forgotten that he was once part of a classic game series that got so many things right. Unless that nostalgia is what allows them to get away with games like Sonic 360.

Shame the GBA version of Sonic 1 turned out so bad. Sonic 1 on a Micro would have been a real pocket-sized treat. But it's not. It's pants.

Honestly, I've paid the "other current current-gen" Sonic so little attention, I didn't really mean to include that one in my statement. All I can tell you is the music's really good. I don't own a 360 or PS3 and the Sonic game for them isn't enough motivation to whip out the old credit card. I want to play Seven Rings at some point (I'll be getting Wii soon), but not for $50...

That's sort of the thing...3D games are in such a sad, contrived state nowadays, I don't really think Sonic 360 can really be as bad as its' made out to be. It's the same thing that gives me hope that Wii's controller will help sort out (hence, one of the reasons I'm  hoping for something from both Seven Rings and Mario Galaxy).

But about your statement...The same could easily be said for any Mario sports title or Mario party (a series whose popularity I will never understand, even when you're NOT playing alone), as far as brand awareness goes. Mario DDR, for example...Neither mascot is above and beyond averageness-pimpage by their respective companies. It's a good strategy though...Take a long look at *guh* Kingdom Hearts. Disney fanatics and FF fanboys in one camera-challenged shot. Mario and Sonic have nothing on that.

And I've read first-hand accounts that they butchered Sonic 1 on the GBA pretty badly.

I think that part of it has to do with who it is that's making the good and bad Mario and Sonic games.  The Mario-branded games that Nintendo themselves make tend to turn out better than the sports ones farmed out to third parties.  Sonic, on the other hand, is completely lost in the hands of his own team.  As far as I'm aware, Sonic Rush wasn't developed in-house, and is the best Sonic game in ages.  It's like other people know to make Sonic games better than Sega themselves.

All that said, though, I think it's quality control that really needs to be focused on - even the lamest of Mario spinoffs tend not to be glitchy and have wonky controls.  Nintendo keeps the developers on too tight a leash.  Sonic Team might well have the right idea, but they need to give the games a little more time in the oven.  I do think that they're a pretty decent developer (how can I ever have anything against the people who made PSO or had anything to do with Feel the Magic?), but they just need focus.  Or something.  Does any of that make sense?

(sidenote - while the TG16 was our main system in the 16 bit era, I did also have a SNES, so I got to play a number of the classics - we just had far fewer games for it than for the Turbo, which was losing support so fast that my dad just picked up buckets of games for like $5 each every time he went to a used game store)

Yep, I'm with everything Joe has said here.

And, honestly, trust me when I say that Sonic 360 is every bit as bad as is made out. It's an abomination.

Yes, it makes sense...BUT, my stance is that it was years between"traditional" Mario games and Nintendo really seemed content to extend the brand name by fishing out the license in the meantime. I can't express in the right terms how many times I rolled my eyes seeing the latest Mario Party or Mario sports game released. That's where I basically grew tired of Mario (and then Sunshine not living up to expectations at all...but's just me). We're just now entering a period where we can really see what Nintendo can do with many games in the franchise (now that they seem to GET that people enjoy their 2D games, as evidenced by NSMB's sales performances), but the wait has been ridiculous.

I'm not really going to worry about who makes what, since the games have to be farmed out in the first place. I think at some point, Nintendo should have looked around and said: "Gee, we've oversaturated the market with Mario-themed games...maybe people are starting to get tired of them. Gee, why was Mario such a big deal to begin with..." And Sega was guilty of the same thing (Sonic Shuffle...bad idea), but I also sympathize with them a bit more, since they're a 3rd party...Brand awareness is pretty crucial for them. Granted, they could've handled that better on all counts, but still...

Being technical, most of the Sonic games past Sonic 1 were made at Sega Technical Institute in the US, not so much by one of their Japanese teams (though they had Japanese developers on the projects).

I don't think I ever had a complaint about the camera.  Sonic and the Secret Rings does have a funny camera when you're trying to move backwards though, but otherwise, it doesn't get in the way too much.

I tried it on Sonic Collection (GC) and Sega Genesis Collection (PS2), and I utterly suck at it.  I had less difficulty adapting to Sonic Rush's gameplay.