2D animation is cheap, yet perceived as valuable because it's rare. There would be a number of advantages to doing a hand-drawn Sonic game, even for the sharks running finance. When fans bring up Mania, my first thoughts actually go to the opening:
That doesn't automatically mean 3D is the most approachable or cost-effective way of doing 2D Sonic. Pixel art is still viable, but it's a different business model than what Sega wants Sonic to be. He'll drop $20 on Mania, but not three times that. Dad will put $10 down for Undertale, but wait for a sale when he sees Shovel Knight's $40 tag. While the last decade showed second graders are quite amenable to pixel art, Sega wants 2D Sonic to be a $60 release-the bigger obstacle is convincing their parents to buy it. Taking a long view I can see where Iizuka's coming from, but I think it's the wrong premise to approach it from whether to use pixel art or not.ĢD games in general reach a broader audience than 3D, and Sonic specifically has to think about the 8-year-old that's never touched a console game before.
