This was from the Sonic grams in SU (7?) :
"Hello! I just want to say that your comics are awesome! The Sonic Universe series is really funny; Omega is one of my favorite characters! Everytime he speaks and destroys his foes, I imagine him talking gangsta'-like. He's so cool! I just want to know if y'all/SEGA are going to make a darker Sonic series like the "grown up" game Shadow the Hedgehog. They gave Shadow guns, then gave Sonic a sword, and made him transform into a werehog. I like the improvements of the games, but I'm wondering what's next?"
and the response?
While the comics will sometimes have their "darker" momemts. we're really more interested in telling fun stories. You can have fun with a little bit of edge but you can't really be all grim-and-gritty and still be accessible to everyone. We're sure you'll like where we go with things though!
some of you squinting at the black and yellow contrasts...it's purely intentional. Feel the shinyness
So, first of all, wow. Archie (and I'm going to take this to mean Ian, because it sure as hell sounds like something he'd say) is saying that a "grim-and-gritty" story isn't accessible to everyone. Y'know because what with Archie's dismal sales and making constant moves to gain new readers : Tania's "manga" Sabrina trying to cash in on manga fans, SU trying to make people interested in the underdeveloped deadweight in their main series so people will give a damn to read it, Archie having to FINALLY get married and out of high school? Yeah. With all the stunts Archie and general has had to pull out it's ass and fact Sonic's sales have declined before the recession (and right at the time I might add Ian got here), Who are they really to tell anybody what a "fun story" is? This book is not "fun" it is on the extreme opposite end of the specturum of "darkness" and has "problem phobia"--crying drama the moment a character stubs their toe. It's often rushed with uninspired characters, the writers put characters on tiers they clearly don't belong on, and the writing doesn't actually facilitate the characters regularly in it. You'd think Archie could learn from it's history what with having to phase out of AoStH tone because people didn't like Sonic too lighthearted.
I'd also at this point make mention that characters like Batman kick the ass of this comic's sales, are still cultural icons, have managed to appeal to children much better than this book, and don't mind in the slightest being routinely "dark". I don't necessarily advocate that the comic NEEDS to be as dark as the actual comic books. Though when you compare the Batman franchise, there's a spectrum to darkness still more popular than this book but not really bleed-your-eyes bright. BtAS was not having the joker rape women or walking into elderly homes to murder people. Nor was Bruce constantly brooding and having persistent flashbacks about the loss of his family, popping guns, being 'gangsta-like and shagging hoes. I don't see why, the tone of this letter must imply something being wrong or abnormal for being interested in a darker story. If Batman, Spiderman or even X-Men, have been accessible to people of all ages, I really am not in the mood to hear this franchise (well..more specifically Ian) make excuses for it's happy happy preferences which it should just state.
So anyway, my second problem is actually with the kid being selected as the "spokesperson" for folks who are tired of Ian's "bleed-you-eyes-SHINIIIES" style of writing. Like I said I'm for one am not asking for routine rape and drug abuse. But the Sonic mythos even started on a tangent darker than this and it never had a problem being accessible to everyone.
* Robotnik enslaving Sonic's furry friends? Check. And before someone says "waaah but they're not sentient so it's not the same," in both the US and JP manuals Tails gets his name from the animals. The friends and so fourth taken from Sonic are most certainly sentient.
*Robotnik taking over cities and refineries where Sonic resides. Check.
*Sonic hating and fighting this oppression. Check.
Is there a regular story featuring rape in that? Murder? No. But the basic premise suggests Sonic routinely has a loss that oppresses him that he's fighting to get back. That was really the main staple of the initial plotline. My problem is how this comic (and most particularly Ian) justify their style of writing and the complete "phasing out" of the attempted atmosphere SatAM went for (which is most reminicent of the three points I mentioned above). Instead of saying "well, I don't like Sonic stories that aren't very light-hearted" they take the interest some people would have in a story a somewhat darker (but not brooding story) and using one kid's request to make it sound like such people mean that they want to see things like "Shadow with guns" "Sonic with a sword" and "werehog Sonic". Sometimes I have to wonder if some of the letters are made up. Why the hell would they think this letter summed up people's interests? Werehog Sonic and Sonic having a sword is "dark"? They do realize that in all their "fun" stories Antoine regularly totes a sword too right? Way to pick a letter that reflects how a good deal of people actually think regarding this book.
