Looks like we have a Mario fanboy here.

Sonic was pitched as "cooler" than Mario, and this appealed to a certain class of young player that very closely identified with the mascot of the game system their parents happened to choose to purchase. Sonic was a more enclosed, self-reflexive universe that tended to concentrate upon itself.

I wonder if all you Sonic haters were members of H.A.G. (Humans Against Genesis), which was likely created by Nintendo in an attempt to mitigate Sega's surging popularity.

I'm with Stanley insofar as trying to get back the devteams that actually made Sega great back in the day, but I'd extend that to just about every fucking Japanese game publisher. Corparate feudalism will basically never allow that to happen, though. Konami, Capcom, Squeenitaiteidos, Bamco, even holy Nintendo, they've all either outright booted some seriously talented/hardworking creators or just aggravated them into walking out.

I never understood the appeal either, other than "games moving fast were new in 1991".

You either played it as a platformer worse than Bonk, or you played it as a Pachinko game where you shot the ball and hoped for the best.

Stars for certain posters consistent portrayal of Sega being a cool, plucky, underground company "surging" with popularity that Nintendo and their fans are desperate to have you forget about...

And not the equally bloated creative corporate wasteland that bungled every. single. opportunity. to level the competition until their company imploded and rose from the ashes as a second rate shovelware publisher.

Every new and remotely decent Sonic game takes time and resources away from a Burning Rangers sequel, so I agree with Stanley.