This. That only counts when Mario, Crash, Spryo, Rayman, etc, actually IMPROVES the formula over the years and KEEPS it relvate to prove itself. This is why Mania is loved and only hated by underages born after the 90s
Meanwhile SA2 was the only "improvements" that even the fanbase can't fully agree on, with SEGA THEMSELVES dropping it by the third game and never looked back. It's not like SA1 was made because the classics didn't work, otherwise Knuckles Chaotix, Pocket Adventure or the Advance games, wouldn't have kept the core elements of the classic games, SA1 was purely built on technical limitations, and SA2 was rushed with what they had, not given the time to improve what was there, just polish a turd so to speak. If it was truely what SEGA wanted for 3D Sonic, Heroes wouldn't have happened. Or the Boost era would have never happened either.
Basically what I'm saying is, SA1 was an attempt. That's ok, nothing wrong with that. But it shouldn't be praised like it reinvented anything, all the examples I stated above btfo's EVERYTHING 3D Sonic started with (at least if SA1 is considered the real first 3D Sonic game). SA1's camera is just crap compared to Mario's take, so is to Rayman and Spyro. Level design is better in Spyro and Rayman, and somehow even Rayman does a better dark story than Sonic does on their first try. Crash does, nay, REIMAGINES dialog animations, making SA1's just a joke in comparision, and many many more. Unlike what Sonic 1 enable in the platformer genre, SA1 does not revolutionize gaming like the other games did better at. And that's why treating SA1/2 as anymore than "good attempts" is just proving how you NEVER played more than shitty Sonic games in all of your levels. Hell if you need a game that actually fixes outdated 3D platformer cameras, look no further than A Hat in Time.