Sonic Lost World’s Tropical Coast Zone Compared On Wii U And 3DS

By Eugene . October 18, 2013 . 4:04pm

We know that the Wii U and 3DS versions of Sonic Lost World are different, such as in terms of RC Gadgets, but it’s also nice to see some comparison shots of maps within the game itself. The screens below are taken from the Tropical Coast Zones 1 to 4 and show, most obviously, the sense of scale that the Wii U has over the 3DS.

 

The above screenshots have one from the Wii U (Above) and one from the 3DS (Below it) and it’s pretty impressive that the 3DS can pack in the kind of long draw distances that the Wii U will be rendering, too. However, closer examination of other shots shows us that the tone of each game also feels slightly different. Where the 3DS ones seem to suggest a slightly slower form of platforming, the Wii U’s larger, more expansive spaces lend themselves to racing around and trying to avoid sudden appearances by robotic enemies.

 

There’s also the clear message that both these games will have areas only reachable/explorable on their own platforms.

 

010 011

 014 015

016 017

018

024

019 020

021 022

 025 026

027 028

029 030

031 032

033 034

035 036

 

Sonic Lost World will be out in North America October 29th for the Wii U and 3DS.


Read more stories about & & & on Siliconera.

  • John Diamond

    It’s a shame about some reviews. IGN’s in particular, it seems like another wonderful 101/ god hand/sonic unleashed/zombie-u/total war rome/DMC devil may cry (feel free to add) for IGN

    • http://www.youtube.com/user/Kevassa02 kevassa

      Yeah I don’t understand what’s with reviewers beating the WiiU with a stick. So far all I seen of the game is incredible.
      Reminds me of Resident Evil Revelations HD when they claimed the WiiU version was the worst due to control problems and frame issues… When none of those problems were to be found and the game runs a lot more stable than any of the other non-PC versions.

      • John Diamond

        thankfully though people understand how dumb the review was. Looking at the comments and the likes and dislikes on the youtube videos.

        I mean the review can be broken down to: ‘why isn’t sonic going fast’
        ‘wow sonic is too slow’
        ‘why can’t i go faster, terrible game’

        • http://www.youtube.com/user/Kevassa02 kevassa

          It’s the same generic put water and ready complaints we heard year after year.
          Complain about how the controls dont work, how there’s too little/too much speed, how the level design is too hard (when they said this for Colors I facepalmed really hard), how gimmicks dont work.
          Never developing on those ideas and just shooting off an incredibly creative game like nothing else.

          I’ve got no more respect for gaming professional critics, I’m afraid.

          • AkuLord3

            If its not big show ones like IGN then yeah but there are plenty of good review sites and YT ones

          • http://www.youtube.com/user/Kevassa02 kevassa

            Oh yeah, I love more thoughtful reviews like Johnny’s reviews or clement’s.
            I like when a review gives me food for thought and makes me think of the deeper aspects of a game, instead of giving me a machine-like biased review.

            I don’t mind when a review puts a game I like negatively; I mind it when they don’t even give insight in the game at all and pull stuff without developing it. I feel as upset with mindless positive reviews that go like “NINTENDOGS IS THE BEST GAME EVER!! THAT IS BECAUSE ITS CUTE AND YOU SHOLD BUY IT! 9/10. NOT ENOUGH DOGS SO I TOOK OUT ONE POINT LULZ!”

          • Miss_Madness

            After a while you realize that reviews generally need to be taken as a grain of salt because of those problems. Not to mention a lot of reviewers these days try to rush through games fast as possible to pop a review out or they’ll only play enough to give themselves the general idea make a review from that.
            And then they miss a crap ton of things that they would have seen if they given themselves time to understand it or get use to it. Or they’re reviewing from a genre, art style, franchise or a console that they absolutely hate and just splash the whole review in even more personal bias. (It wouldn’t be so bad if they reign in that fact and try to be neutral but I swear it hardly ever works that way. )

          • http://www.youtube.com/user/Kevassa02 kevassa

            Yes, I agree with you. Most reviews sadly are as you describe….
            But luckily there are good individuals out there that do give some pretty good insight on their thoughts of the games. I mean, no review can be perfect or objective by virtue of it being opinions. But it can be a great way to make players think and appreciate details or open their eyes to glaring faults nostalgia has hidden away.

          • Jeffrey Thrash

            This is no different from movie reviews, play reviews, or book reviews. Reviews can be helpful in helping me make a purchasing decision, but the problem is that the critique industry is likely run by cynical people who either had the joy sucked out of their life and can’t enjoy anything or people who comfortably take bribes whenever they have the option.

          • Laer_HeiSeiRyuu

            Except there is a lot more money involved.

            Makes everything different. Perception and time usage as well

          • Jeffrey Thrash

            This is true. Given how expensive retail games are these days, I wouldn’t blame a gamer for listening to the cons more than the pros. Still, for the same reason, video game critics should be held to a higher standard.

          • http://www.youtube.com/user/Kevassa02 kevassa

            To be completely honest I never watch movie or book reviews. I have no idea why it didnt dawn to me until a few years ago how silly game reviews became. And yes, they are indeed pretty similar to the rest of the critique industry.

          • ChristyKf9

            The fact that people on IGN found Sonic Colors level design difficult made them lose all credibility in my eyes. Sonic Colors was easy but time consuming if you try to get all the red stars

          • http://www.youtube.com/user/Kevassa02 kevassa

            It baffles me how they could find Sonic Colors hard, let alone frustrating. The game does have some cheap shot moments at the end, yes, but it’s nothing that should be considered frustrating and in general there’s nothing in the game that can leave you thinking “wait, I died?”.
            In comparison, while I love Sonic Heroes it’s filled to the brim with cheap deaths. Tons of conveniently placed hazards, enemies or pitfalls.
            Colors is an easy to play game but not in a silly, bland way. I find it quite interesting they think the game is difficult when, at least I personally, didn’t think it was any more difficult than the perfect score Galaxy 2 (which I also love, may I add).

          • ChristyKf9

            I loved Sonic Generation I just wish they didn’t screw up the Sonic vs Shadow battles. They really should try going back to Sonic Adventure 2/Battle format but with modern graphics. If they did that, kept the speed but improved the turn by turn of speed boost, and make a great story then they’d have no problems.

          • http://www.youtube.com/user/Kevassa02 kevassa

            Isn’t what you described Lost Worlds? The only difference is that you have better control of Sonic’s speed, he has parkour, a stomp attack and wisps.
            It’s the closest game to Sonic’s Sonic Adventure formula since Sonic 06.

          • ChristyKf9

            Sonic 0 what I’ve never heard that o.0?? So it must not exist. Lost world is a start but it seems a bit gimmicky. I do like the purely running stage but I’ll miss Sonic’s speed running on water during speed boost from the other console titles.

          • http://www.youtube.com/user/Kevassa02 kevassa

            Well, I’m gonna probably say something that you may not like but don’t take it as an offense. I’ve played and adored the original Adventure for many years and had I not revisited both the original and the sequel I’d completely agree with you.
            But in closer inspection they are very ambitious games suffering from gameplay roulette and struggling with the Dreamcast’s limits in terms of level design.
            I’d say Lost Worlds is a lot less gimmicky to me considering how it focuses solely on one gameplay style and builds the entire game around a solid platforming experience.

            I’d love to see more characters, developed characters and interesting varied styles; but I realize that whenever Sonic tried this they had to sacrifice something and the overall package falls short on itself. While SA1 and 2 were fabulous for their time, I genuinely think they were the beggining of many flaws that ridden the franchise until Colors. They were forgivable in 1998 and 2001, but the series evolved past that point.

            I still miss certain things unique to SA (like the Chao raising. Somewhat. :p) but I think it just wouldn’t work nowadays and would detract from the main experience (FIND THE KEYS. FISH FROGGY. LETS KART RACE!! In the end you ended up doing more side stuff than -actual- platforming).

            I’m just rambling, but what I mean is that they essentially are trying to focus on the best parts of SA series and modern era while combining classic elements; I’m very interested how well all of these ideas would play out on the final product. Doing another Adventure game nowadays, with everything it brings to the table, would most likely turn a disaster (Sonic06) due to the huge amount of development stress it’d require to polish every gameplay style to the level of Sonic’s with the current sluggish and expensive game development cycle.
            I’m quite positive Lost Worlds could be my favorite 3D Sonic game if it did the finer points right.

          • John Diamond

            if they ever remake adventure , they should base it off Sonic 06, minus the bugs. not adventure. The original adventure series were extremely linear, and you were barely rewarded for attaining emblems. in Adventure you got about a handful of crappy gamegear games and a metal sonic skin, and in adventure 2 battle, you only got Green hill zone.
            Both games were riddled with camera issues (adventure 1 especially) and flaws in systems such as grinding and physics (see Final Chase and rush) led to extremely cheap deaths.
            I haven’t played 06 fully, but the Demo version i played was extremely good and was a step up from the adventure games and a few hundred steps up from the retail version

          • http://www.youtube.com/user/Kevassa02 kevassa

            Honestly they shouldn’t remake Sonic Adventure or do anything like Sonic 06 ever again. All the problems you mentioned are present in Sonic 06 elevated a million times.
            If they had focused on Sonic, Shadow and Silver only, made the stages a lot better paced and removed all the crap town missions and optimized the engine so it wasn’t a horrible glitchy experience it’d be probably more than Sonic: And the Lost Loading Times.

            And if you think about it, if you salvage the good points of Sonic 06…. You pretty much end up with Unleashed/Colors/Modern Sonic in Generations.

          • Laer_HeiSeiRyuu

            This game is kinda like adventure.

            Plotwise.

          • Jeffrey Thrash

            Clearly, if IGN finds Sonic games hard (they are certainly easier than Mario and Rayman games) it’s because they have become used to the “aim assists” and “Super Play modes” of most mainstream games.

        • Auvers

          all their reviews are “man sonic hasnt been good for awhile aside for those two that were good also this game isnt fast and bad”

        • grevlinghore

          And don´t forget: “it´s too hard Q_Q”

      • SiliconNooB

        Incorrect.

        I can’t speak to the controls, but the framerate issues are very real [though not necessarily significant].

        http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-resident-evil-revelations-face-off

        • http://www.youtube.com/user/Kevassa02 kevassa

          You are using the exact review I was talking about, actually :p

          Play the game by yourself and you’ll see for yourself the FPS drop isn’t any worse than PS360 versions at all.

          Wanna know what’s a complainable FPS drop? Play Odin Sphere.

          • SiliconNooB

            The numbers don’t lie.

            That doesn’t mean that the game is unplayable, and it doesn’t mean that every player is going to notice the frame drops. That is what I meant by “though not necessarily significant“.

          • http://www.youtube.com/user/Kevassa02 kevassa

            That’d be cool except they don’t tell us with exact science how those numbers come to be. Even with a debug version the printed FPS isn’t exactly the processed FPS. I’m a system engineer in training and I can tell you that FPS printed on-screen in games can fluctuate compared to the actual rendered and outputed FPS due to a lot of factors.
            And I’m not exactly sure IF they are using a debug version.
            Funny thing is, even then that’d not be completely representative of a final product (even if the FPS printing was perfect) because there’s also the firmware they are using on the WiiU which could be different from a retail version or optimizations made on a final release.

            There’s a lot of factors out in the air to even believe them.
            They pull numbers in an incredibly mistifying way and expect us to believe them when there’s no conceivable way when actually playing the game that you -notice-.

            “Furthermore, frame-rates are hit harder when the engine is under load
            and this has a larger impact on the controls compared to on the 360 and
            PS3. Aiming and moving around in general feels heavier and less
            responsive in the Wii U – there appears to a much larger dead-zone that
            creates a delay between moving the analogue sticks and the action
            appearing on screen.”

            These problems -simply dont happen-.
            There’s nowhere in the game the FPS drop to such levels you lose control. There’s no apparent deadzone problem.

            They are just trying to be sensationalist and put the WiiU down because it’s the new trend right now.
            Enmity sells.

          • SiliconNooB

            Digital Foundry are experts at making mountains out of molehills, but they don’t just invent problems. And you are grasping at straws.

            Perhaps different firmwares can alter the performance of games – but that is immaterial when the other versions of the game are performing to a higher standard. At any rate, I don’t see why Digital Foundry would not be using the most current Wii U firmware.

            Digital Foundry have a set-up which allows them to measure the latency between a button press and the time it takes for the corresponding action to appear on screen – so if they say there is a degree of latency, then I’m inclined to believe them.

            http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/digitalfoundry-tech-focus-battle-against-latency

            As for framerate – I imagine DF probably capture the footage, and then use custom software to analyse it for frames per second. I’d imagine that they use pretty accurate software, but even if they didn’t, all versions are subject to the same measure, so assuming all versions of a game use the same vsync solution, then it should still provide a fairly accurate indication of the disparity of framerate between versions.

            I’m pretty sure that DF have outlined their methodology before, but I am unable to find it.

    • TrevHead

      This game is certainly one to try and evaluate for myself IMO.

      When it comes to retro style games, the preferences of myself and the average game reviewers are so out of sync that I often regard gameplay elements reviewers don’t like as good.

      • John Diamond

        that’s the issue, some people just go on there see an ign/gamespot review and go ‘hey this game sucks, oh well’ and boom, sega loses sales

    • http://linkapics.tumblr.com/ Linka

      At this point, I’ve found that most professional/major game reviews aren’t worth my time anymore.

      If I’m interested in a game, then I’ll go for it. Or I’ll try to find someone who’s been going at the game at their own pace to talk about it– at least I might then get a good idea of what to expect of the game.

      • http://youtube.com/user/Chubunater Chubunato

        I feel the same way. Most reviewers who use a score system are full of shit anyway.

        • http://linkapics.tumblr.com/ Linka

          Yeaaah, it doesn’t help that companies put so much of a reliance on metacritic now, too… when Metacritic tries to scale all of the various scores (be it out of 4, 5, 10, ect) to match their figuring out of, so if something has 4 out of 5 stars, they figure, “oh, that must be an 80%”, when in general the meaning of 4/5 is entirely different in review standards.

          So not only is the score system terrible and people try too hard to generalize it, and at this point a 7 means “average” and 5 means “bad”, but it negatively affects the companies in question, and reviews themselves by any major site or group (IGN, Gamespot, Game Informer, ect.) are marred by time issues, sometimes reviewer incompatibility, the lack of the experience that would be had by a normal player…

          Honestly reviews kinda suck. :(

          • http://youtube.com/user/Chubunater Chubunato

            Couldn’t have said it better myself

    • JustThisOne

      I kinda of also want to note that it’s not entirely the fault of the reviewer. People who just skim through for scores are to blame as well. When I read reviews, I read the whole thing to see what they liked or didn’t like. That’s what really matters to me – not the over all score. You really have to read through reviews and figure out what’s written based on preferences, and what’s written based on actual gameplay.

      The only thing I got out of the IGN review was how Sonic doesn’t *feel* as fast, and how the level design contributes to that *feel*. Understandable. But it wasn’t written that way.

  • Antonio C. R. Murray

    This ain’t 2004 and the sooner reviewers who really can’t play games for shit realize the existence of social media, the sooner they can keep it movin and do something else.

    • http://gentlerobot.com/ Gentle Robot

      Do that many people read IGN for reviews?

      Where else do you look for reviews, other than game blogs? On amazon every game has 4.5 stars, and fans actively trawl the reviews looking for negatives to reply to, like it’s a crime to dislike their favorite game.

  • Happy Gamer

    Anyone play tested this? I am wondering what it is like for gamers not reviewers. Altho sites like IGN do get some things right, I always remember they need to review the game as well. So it’s hard to let go of mistakes etc.

  • TheLastBattalion

    Wii U version looks amazing while the 3DS version looks pretty plain in comparison. I just hope the 3DS version plays well (still want to buy it eventually)

Video game stories from other sites on the web. These links leave Siliconera.

Siliconera Tests
Siliconera Videos

Popular