Sonic Adventure: A Failure?

In the year 1998, the Sega Dreamcast was released to the excitement of fans all over the world. To prove the console's power, Sega released the then long awaited leap to 3D for their best-selling franchise: Sonic the Hedgehog. The big 3D debut's name was Sonic Adventure. But... was it a retrospective failure?

FULL DISCLOSURE: This was my very first Sonic game, so it's a nostalgia trip for me.

Let me not mince words: the game was a financial success. It sold pretty damn well, and it helped launch the Dreamcast. At 2.5 million copies sold, there is no question that the game was a success. So, why am I even raising the question if the game is a failure or not? And what do I even mean by 'failure?'

To answer this question, I invite you all to remove your nostalgia goggles and actually take a look at Sonic Adventure from a technological standpoint. The true question regarding Sonic Adventure is: what was its technological purpose?

The answer, of course, is to translate Sonic's gameplay from 2D to 3D. Now, what's the difference between the two? Simply put: one allows for complex level design, and the latter doesn't. Of course I'm aware that what I'm saying is nigh nonsensical, so I'll explain it.

Take, for example, the level design of Green Hill Zone from the original Sonic the Hedgehog. It is a big, wide stage with no less than three alternate routes, all which lead to the same goal. "Oh, but what's the difference, then?" Simply put, each route is faster than the last, but requires far more skill to go through. The upper route requires more timed jumps, while the lower pathway is infested with spikes and pitfalls. It is a level that tests your skills, and takes time to truly master.

Now we compare that level to Sonic Adventure's Emerald Coast. The entire first half of the stage is all one single line (that, to be fair, zig zags a bit) with some "islands" with goodies scattered about. Enemies are few, far between, and are easy to spot. There are some spiked gates which can slow you down and impede your progress, but most of these are easy to just BYPASS. Seriously, you can walk right by most of these gates.

Alright, personal anecdote time. Whenever I play Green Hill Zone, there's never a guarantee that I'll make it through the whole thing without losing a life. YES Act 1 can be beaten in half a minute, but that sort of accomplishment requires skill. Now I ain't half bad at vidya, but that doesn't mean a game can't kick my ass. It takes me a while to get into a groove for me to beat Green Hill Zone without dying; I recently played Emerald Coast for the first time in 17 years, and not only did I not lose a life, but I beat the stage only getting hit ONCE! Seventeen years out of practice! And that's not even getting into Windy Valley, which I beat in one try, no hits. Seventeen years rusty.

Back on topic; Sonic Adventure had to prove ONE thing: that Sonic games are just as good in 3D as they are in 2D. Problem with 3D: the camera. In a 3D game you can't just go in a straight line, because that's boring shit (unless it's a racing game). This is a problem that Super Mario 64 solved for its franchise: the trick to making the 3D leap is to slow down gameplay and make levels big, wide, and open.

Could Sonic do that? In one word: no. This is where I need to draw up the comparison between Mario and Sonic to make a point. In the 2D era, both games were known for requiring speed, precision, and skill to beat. The difference, of course, lays in what the games emphasized; Mario was always about jumping, while Sonic was always about running fast. THIS is why Mario made a successful leap to 3D on his first try: it's easier to slow down a 3D model if the emphasis is on jumping over obstacles and enemies.

Sonic, on the other hand, didn't have that luxury. Sonic was all about speed, and that meant that levels had to feel like you were truly zipping through them. This meant the camera was always behind Sonic, or in front of him during certain sequences. But a 3D game requires camera movement, otherwise it's not REALLY 3D! And it is on this one requirement that Sonic Adventure utterly failed!

The camera on Sonic Adventure is slow. Very slow. There were times that I had to STOP just to move it a little, so I could see where I was going! A SONIC game, where I STOP just to see where I was going! This is the OPPOSITE of how Sonic should play!

And THAT is how Sonic Adventure utterly failed to translate Sonic's gameplay from 2D to 3D: by making the game 3D, the franchise lost the complexity of its 2D levels. By making the camera so slow and cumbersome, the player is often forced to slow down just to see where they are going.

The problem then became that 2D Sonic and 3D Sonic, much like 2D and 3D Mario, were two entirely different beasts. With 3D Sonic you couldn't explore levels anymore and find different pathways to beat the level. This severely cut back on the replayability of each level; though this problem was somewhat soothed by adding extra challenges, it was often always still the same path, over and over again. It gets monotonous quick.

So then, why didn't this spell the end of Sonic the Hedgehog? Because for all the problems the game had, there was still an inkling of brilliance to the game, a promise of what's to come. Although levels were more linear now, they were also more cinematic. This is best exemplified by the sequence in Emerald Coast where Sonic has to outrun an orca that's destroying the ground he walks on. This is a brilliantly memorable sequence, and one that gets payed homage in later games.

There are also sequences where Sonic's bouncing around gives the player a brilliant view of how big most stages are. Again I point to Windy Valley; a short, easy, but breathtaking level. There are loops that go around and around, and the camera tries so hard to keep up with Sonic that it ends up just pulling away and then pulling closer once Sonic exits the loop. And then there's the part where Sonic goes down a ninety degree angle, with the camera in front of him! It's all quite the sight!

Ah, but with every positive, we have a negative. Some levels, such as Casinopolis or the Ice Caps, don't feel like Sonic levels at all. With a severe lack of areas where you go at top speeds (and in fact Ice Caps feels too much like a wannabe Mario game) these levels were in dire need of a re-tool to be considered worthy of a Sonic game.

I can best describe this game as being akin to that "weird" part of puberty when you still feel like a kid, but your body's starting to disagree with you. When your voice is still squeaky, but you're growing hair on your upper lip.

The first level to give us a REAL inkling for what 3D Sonic could REALLY achieve was Speed Highway (level 6). A level full of zips and zooms, with cinematic backgrounds, awesome music, high amounts of enemies...it's an almost PERFECT level!

But in regards to the original question: is this game a failure as a transition between 2D and 3D Sonic? My answer is: mostly yes. Many levels, particularly Casinopolis and Ice Caps, feel awkward and "not Sonic." Other levels are barely a challenge, such as Emerald Coast or Windy Valley. And that's not even getting into how easy the bosses are! And of course, this is ignoring the OTHER playable characters, none of which are as fun to play as Sonic! Only Tails and E-102 Beta come close! But beneath the crud, you'll find hidden gems. Speed Highway is a great level, as is Final Egg. Perfect Chaos is one hell of a final boss. And of course...THAT SOUNDTRACK!!!

Sonic Adventure has, unfortunately, not aged well. This is in stark contrast to the Genesis games, which in my opinion, have aged like fine wine. I'd even say the sequel, Sonic Adventure 2, has aged better! But of course, the game is FAR from being terrible (unlike Sonic '06), it simply doesn't compare to what's come after AND before.