Is Sonic Being the SEGA Mascot Good or Bad?

[FlareHabanero]

A warning a head of time, but this topic is not about personally hating or loving Sonic nor is it an argument of what direction the franchise should go into. So keep things civil in this regard.

A recent thought came into my head.


Sonic the Hedgehog as we are well aware is SEGA's mascot since the 90's with no signs of that changing. He was built from the ground up to be a mascot for the company with his signature blue color and attitude to contrast with Mario, with his overall design being chosen over dozens of potential stuff with successful results. He's an iconic figure in gaming to the point where his presence caused a flood of games trying to copy the "mascot with attitude" trope to mixed results, and helped push sales of SEGA consoles. No matter how much you try to deny it, there is still to this day a dedicated crowd that likes Sonic and the franchise in general.

However, a mascot is supposed to be the face of a company, which is where the controversial part comes in. The franchise tends to suffer from mediocre to terrible reception, yet SEGA likes to put an emphasis on Sonic since the franchise is so iconic. They put so much emphasis on it that it has a habit of overshadowing their other IPs. When you combine both factors, it gives people the bad impression that SEGA is "that company that only makes terrible Sonic games", ignoring the fact that they still make quality franchises like Valkyrie Chronicles, Yakuza, Puyo Puyo, Phantasy Star Online, and more.


When I think of both sides, I do have to wonder. Is Sonic being the mascot of SEGA a good thing or a bad thing? Is it just a case of 50/50 hindsight stabbing them in the back or is it all a cheap method of getting attention that masks the big issue? Is it good to have a iconic yet flawed franchise be the image of a company?

[CrazyT]

I think sonic being the mascot is great, but I think SEGA or the people in charge of sonic in general (Iizuka?), just have bad taste. Sonic Boom for example is such an odd thing to me because the redesigns seem awfully unnescesary. I definitly think sonic needed some subtle redesigning to make him more appealing. I dont think the modern sonic from sonic adventure 2 and on looks appealing.

I do like certain aspects about the sonic boom design for example. But they went too far perhaps. I dunno maybe im far off the tastes of today, but I think any succes sonic boom could have would never be based on sonic's design change. Not even slightly. I absolutly love the world, personality and overall theme however. I think that the portrayal of a character even to the extent of how he looks can be very important for its succes. But right now sonic for me personally is not an appealing character.

Having said that, I could never see anything but sonic as SEGA's mascot. He does have a unique thing to him compared to any other IP of SEGA. I think at this point it isnt a good thing, but it could be a great thing if the right people were deciding about it. We dont know whats happening behind closed doors right now, but I have a feeling they are strongly rethinking stuff for the next sonic game. I sure hope its not gonna be made in the sonic boom theme...

[Sharky]

Yes and no.

While I do think he should continue to be the front man, I think SEGA should aim for a more ensemble cast approach. SEGA have a lot of mascot material and I think pushing a few 'mascot characters' would be cool. Nintendo do it, and it works well for them. SEGA were doing it too with the All-Star games but we haven't seen one of those in a while.

As for Sonic, the moment Sonic games return to greatness favour in his character will return too. I think the self-aware comedy aspect of the recent Sonic Boom cartoons is a great direction to take the franchise. Everybody loves to laugh.

[FlareHabanero]

I know SEGA of Japan goes for a more assemble approach. Like in addition to Sonic they also tend to publicize stuff like Vocaloid/Project Diva, Puyo Puyo, Phantasy Star Online, and SEGA Hard Girls. The problem is that in other territories they don't try the same approach, which makes the issue worse.

[Centrale]

I think company mascots are kind of part of a bygone era. Nevertheless, maybe we could hand the mantle over to Akiyama for a while. I like his style.

[Tad]

Mascots were a very 80s-90s thing.

[Barry the Nomad]

With SEGA being a third party video game company, Sonic isn't absolutely necessary. I'd even argue that mascots are indeed a dated concept as Sony and Microsoft don't exactly flaunt mascots nowadays. However, I think Sonic has been a mascot for so long that to suddenly drop him would be a bad move on SEGA's part. While there are gamers out there who see Sonic as being a series that is "mediocre to terrible", there are also the general public, casual gamers, and a large fanbase who just plain like Sonic and when they see him they immediately think of the good times. 

In my opinion, Sonic is essentially an extension of the SEGA logo. You see SEGA, you think SEGA. You see Sonic, you think SEGA. It still works, so why change it up.

[Tad]

While we're on the subject, I don't there's been that many bad Sonic games as such. Sonic 06 and Boom are without doubt the worst, but the rest ranged average/solid to great.

I think part of the problem is the different demographics they keep trying to hit. They need to keep it simple like it was back in the 90s.

[Barry the Nomad]

I think those steeped in SEGA and Sonic fandom, like ourselves, are a minority when it comes to the general view of the Sonic series. It really is not viewed as being anywhere near as bad as some on in fan community think. The general public remembers the classics, the cartoons, the comics, the merch, the commercials, the Dreamcast era, and the recent stuff that has had wide release like All-Stars Racing and Generations.

I also disagree with the notion that Sonic himself is a dated trope of edgy attitude. The character design is simple and classic, and was meant to evoke Mickey Mouse. Sonic doesn't sport sunglasses or a leather jacket or have some cross-promotional gimmick (like wearing dated sneakers - well, aside from Sonic Adventure 2). In my opinion the original design is timeless, and the most recent design (as seen in Colors and Runners) is equally timeless, with different proportions.

In the past I've equated Sonic with Spider-Man. Both have similar attitudes during action scenes. But I'd also like to point out that Sonic also carries with him incredible laziness. Just look at how often he is relaxing by a beach or sleeping under a tree. Sonic isn't one to want constant attention and action, he likes his me time and can sometimes be incredibly self centered. He actually reminds me a bit of Donald Duck in both his laziness and ability to become easily frustrated and driven to extremes when provoked.

[Tad]

Yeah, I don't agree with those who say he's dated. I'd happily argue Mario feels far more dated as a character.

Saying that though, I'm really hoping the Boom look goes away soon. I find it tacky and pointless. I just hope the next Sonic game does nail the look and gameplay. I'm not sure if the Generations gameplay should be carried on, but something similar would be pretty cool.

Also, I think the decline in 3D platformers is part of the issue. It's something Rare have struggled with too. Think about it though, back in the 90s, you could find a 3D platformer every other week. Now though, there's Mario and....well, yeah. Unless you own an Nintendo console, there's little else. They seem to slow down in the 00s to what we have now.

[Barry the Nomad]

I don't mind Boom as a side series, no different from the Archie Sonic canon or the days of Sonic Underground where that Sonic had a guitar necklace and siblings. But I am really getting tired of seeing Boom Sonic as the face of the Sonic social network accounts. Most people are following for the Sonic we've known for close to 25 years, not the new Boom design. Hopefully once the next Sonic Team game is released we will see a shift to the Sonic Team Sonic in the PR materials and accounts.

[Tad]

I am curious as to how long they're going to push the Boom version. They've got another game coming out for it and the series seem to be doing well. If the new game does well, then perhaps they'll prolong it.

[EnternalHope]

With SEGA being a third party video game company, Sonic isn't absolutely necessary. I'd even argue that mascots are indeed a dated concept as Sony and Microsoft don't exactly flaunt mascots nowadays. However, I think Sonic has been a mascot for so long that to suddenly drop him would be a bad move on SEGA's part. While there are gamers out there who see Sonic as being a series that is "mediocre to terrible", there are also the general public, casual gamers, and a large fanbase who just plain like Sonic and when they see him they immediately think of the good times. 

In my opinion, Sonic is essentially an extension of the SEGA logo. You see SEGA, you think SEGA. You see Sonic, you think SEGA. It still works, so why change it up.

Sonic The Hedgehog is what helped give SEGA an identity. He's to SEGA, what Mickey Mouse is to Disney. He's an Icon. He'll never go away.


Sonic The Hedgehog the main series itself is now under Sega of Japan's complete control and management. I think this a much more sound and proper approach since SOJ never really influenced or managed him. It was always Sega of America who did. And now they're handling Sonic Boom.


As for the mediocre quality games, the reason is simple: He doesn't belong on non Sega home platforms. Period. That's like saying Mario Galaxy would be fun on PS4. Back in the Early 2000s, keeping the franchise going forward was a necessity,  and Sega becoming more software focused was a vital move that was needed to save them.(It's now a complete necessity.).


Sonic was created specifically for FAST paced, High Speed gameplay in which was duplicated using Sega's hardware schematics.(Mega Drive had a fast CPU so its Sonic games exploited that) What made him so unique and special was that each title was developed for a specific SEGA console. Completely from the ground up. I'm sure Sonic Pool would have be something special had Peter Morewic gotten STI on board and encouraged them to drop the doomed 32X/Mars' developed Sonic Mars/Xtreme.


Sonic 2006's tragedy is that it was 360 exclusive at first, and then Sony licensed it for PS3 giving Sega little to no time or experience to properly code and program the game for PS3 a NEW yet to be launched platform at the time. It probably wouldn't have turned out so bad, had it remained exclusive to 360.


People keep whining and moaning over ROL, without understanding that BigRedButton started development of it on Wii U from the ground up, but didn't understand how to code a proper engine, nor did they have any inexperience working with slower hardware. To be fair, the fans ASKED that someone else besides ST develop a game and they got what they asked for.


Notice how everytime SEGA tries to develop a Sonic game from the ground up on other consoles, it always falls short no matter what they do, even porting to various consoles seems to always have mixed results.


The Reason why Sonic Dash and Sonic Runners have been so successful is that they have the right audience and demographic as well as a much more broad market that's easier to please. Console Gamers have gotten so picky,double minded and overzealous, one minor issue would cause them to start spewing hyperbole and anti Sonic rhetoric. The sad thing is that, during Sonic Heroes, people whined and complained that he had too many characters, and then by Generations, they started whining that you can't play as other characters.

[Tad]

I don't think I've cared how many characters there are personally (providing there's not a ridiculous amount), just so long as they're well implemented.

[Nameless 24]

For me, I grew up with Sonic being my VERY first game in general, and I cannot possibly thank the franchise enough for getting me into gaming overall.


I personally think Sonic has so much potential and utilised correctly, could be and should be as well known as Mario in terms of gaming quality.


The problem I personally believe is that SEGA don't take advantage of what Sonic should be. A somewhat simplistic platforming game that explores with level design and basic Badniks/Robots and the clever contraptions Robotnik/Eggman uses. Instead you get wild experimentation that usually don't work out.


Now if Tails, Knuckles, Amy etc were utilised as an experimental side to the franchise, I wouldn't be too bothered (Tails being the mechanic is something I am used to, Knuckles being the brawn is also fine). I don't even mind Sonic's vast cast of friends and foes.


The problem is more how Sonic's branding comes across to those who grew up with him. Retro Sonic Shirts sell, merchandise sells, and even with the modern design, the overall image of Sonic is great and valued by many people...but the games haven't helped him.


I personally think he's the right mascot for SEGA, but there is definitely an identity problem with his games.


I think he does need a break from games, and perhaps only appear in other SEGA games as an Easter Egg. This promotes SEGA's other games and people like seeing stuff like Sonic in other games where you least expect him.


The problem with mascots is trying to expose them in a positive light as he/she represents your whole brand worldwide. Sonic is definitely something unique SEGA can leverage.


Now, I may no longer play Sonic games in general, but seeing him on merchandise warms my heart that Mario has sadly never done (Kirby has the same effect on me).


He's also a good mascot for SEGA to introduce kids to their products, so there's another positive trait to the blue blur.