>>714518645
>The game is very overtly about environmentalism and how civilization abusing natural resources leads to disaster
No, it was obviously a pretty standard cautionary tale about abusing power for selfish gains. And maybe a little "war bad." Which is fine.

That said, SA1 wasn't really written by "writers." So it's not surprising that there isn't exactly a big moral to take away, other than "don't be a selfish shithead, kids", I guess.
>What was learned here exactly? We should be more positive? What?
I think they were going for "let go of anger and move on from the past" type of thing, but again, SA1 wasn't written by writers, so the whole message is muddled and nothing ties together in a neat little bow at the end like it might with a real writer at the helm. It's just a series of events and set pieces that the developers thought would be cool. That's it. Nothing more, nothing less. Many such cases in the Sonic series. Fans overthink the hell out of this.

The "let go of the past" theme was further explored in SA2, (and ran straight into the ground with ShadowTH and Shadow Gens) but that might actually be a coincidence since Maekawa didn't seem to give much of a shit about anything that came before SA2. It's also just a really common trope.

>>714519548
That other anon is being a faggot, but I have to agree that the whole environmentalism aspect of Sonic wasn't really a major story element beyond saving animals from robots after the Classic era. Modern Sonic is just more about stopping "le Egghead" and calling it a day.