Carnifex
SasqWatch
What does IP stand for in this situation? I'm used to it meaning internet provider, but here I'm assuming it means something like initial proposal or something?
-Carn
-Carn
South Park RPG - Animating the Game
- Thread starter Dhruin
- Start date
Intellectual Property
Carnifex
SasqWatch
I'm laughing at the thought of using the word intellectual with anything associated with South Park. Honestly, I've not laughted this hard in days! Unless JDR just trolled me, which would make me sad =x.
-Carn
-Carn
- Joined
- September 16, 2011
- Messages
- 791
Hey, it takes intelligence to do some of the satire they do! I actually think quite a bit of their humor is of a pretty high level of intelligence. At the very least, a good deal of it takes a quick wit. There's just so much low-brow toilet humor thrown in there that a lot of people ignore the rest. That's what makes it good though, they tackle humor from so many angles!
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2011
- Messages
- 791
KalosKagathos
Watcher
What's so hard to believe about it? Combat is the heart and soul of any RPG. It's what the G stands for. Everything else serves to support it: advancement systems define what you character is capable of, exploration is the process of seeking out better equipment and stronger enemies, and story is there to give some deeper meaning to dungeon crawling and killing things (ideally, it also allows the player to choose his character's enemies). So why shouldn't the South Park RPG strive to be a good RPG and include well thought-out combat mechanics?rossrjensen said:
Another thing to do keep in mind is that it's the first turn-based RPG by a major western developer in a long time. I don't want people judging TB combat as a whole based on South Park and thinking that Todd and Pete were completely justified in saying that turn-based is a relic of the past.
I couldn't endure The Witcher 2 past the prologue, but a QTE is a QTE, so most likely yes.CountChocula said:
EDIT: Just watched a YouTube video of a TW2 fist fight, and it's not quite the same. In Paper Mario, you still select commands as usual. QTEs come after you give an order and decide the effectiveness of the action. Essentially, it's a failed attempt to eliminate the random factor in RPGs and replace it with a test of player's skill. The fist fights in The Witcher 2, on the other hand, seem to consist of nothing but QTEs and serve as yet another proof of CDPR's utter inability to grasp what makes combat in action games tick.
Absolutely. There's nothing fantastic about a comedy series that isn't funny.JDR13 said:
No, that's what makes it bad. Why would anyone want to sit through 20 minutes of toilet humor for the sake of one or two good jokes buried somewhere in there?rossrjensen said:
Last edited:
I rest my case.
Anyway - this is not going to be a high-cost, high-profile game. It's going to be a fun little romp through the South Park world, and it's not being sold to hardcore RPG fans; if you don't LIKE South Park, then there is no logical reason at all that you should be interested in or upset about this game! It's not even going to divert Obsidian's resources a significant amount, if you're a big Obsidian fan.
And, seriously, stop making assumptions about a game that doesn't even exist yet. There are a GREAT many excellent classic RPGs that prosper in spite of their flaws. Fallout 1 and 2, while indisputably being superior to every game in the series that came after them in this aspect, had generally pretty weak turn-based combat. It was just *passable*; easily breakable, and 1 was egregious in underpowered skills. Fallout 1 and 2 were terrible compared to, say, Jagged Alliance, but it's the heart and soul of the game that counts, not the cold mechanics. You have no idea what the South Park RPG is going to be like, especially not based on the loose claim of Obsidian that "it will be inspired by Paper Mario."
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2011
- Messages
- 5
KalosKagathos
Watcher
I'm not particularly fond of any Fallout game. I'm not even sure I'd call their combat mechanics passable, since shooting the eyes was the best decision you could make most of the time, and your character didn't even need particularly high gun skills to pull off eye shots consistently. What was your point again?
But it's not a loose claim, is it? Paper Mario is a very specific reference point. It has its fans, but it's hardly a household name or an obscure high point of the genre greatly appreciated by the hardcore, so why mention it if the South Park RPG doesn't work like it? Gameplay footage may change my mind, but right now I see no reason to be optimistic.
You're right. I guess that's why South Park has been such a colossal failure the last 14+ years.
Now this is where you reply that it's only popular because everyone else had horrible taste...
KalosKagathos
Watcher
Wait, I can't call your ad populum out for being just that? OK.You're right. I guess that's why South Park has been such a colossal failure the last 14+ years.
Now this is where you reply that it's only popular because everyone else had horrible taste…
Asdraguuhl
Keeper of the Watch
Is it really?
C'mon, don't tell me that you refuse to accept that even the most experienced among RPG veterans have failed to come up with a definitive definition of an RPG that is universally accepted.
KalosKagathos
Watcher
Indeed it is. Think, what else could it be?
Story? There are many story-driven games, but not all of them are RPGs. Adventure games, most notably. Claiming story is the most fundamental aspect of RPGs will also prevent many dungeon crawlers from qualifying as RPGs.
Freedom to make your choices? This will mean that visual novels are the finest RPGs of them all (Torment jokes incoming), and again, it will prevent a lot of dungeon crawlers from qualifying.
Freedom of exploration? You'll have to count sandbox games like GTA as RPGs and disregard linear games in this case.
Stats-driven combat is the only thing that all RPGs have in common: early dungeon crawlers, JRPGs, Diablo clones, Bethesda sandboxes, BioWare games, all of them. Treating anything else as the cornerstone will exclude games that should be included and include games that should be excluded. It's simple, really.
Asdraguuhl
Keeper of the Watch
I agree that all games that "claim" to be an RPG have in common that they have a stats driven or skill based combat system.
But that is not what I have interpreted from your phrase "Combat is the heart and soul of any RPG", which made me think that you consider combat to be the single most important element of RPG's, and with that I do not agree, and neither will many others as each player values different things in their RPG experience.
Btw, a bad combat system does not necessarily imply a bad RPG.
KalosKagathos
Watcher
Your interpretation is 100% correct.
And that's perfectly fine. If everyone had the same opinion, there would be no point to forums, as nothing would be gained from interacting with other people posting there.
It implies an RPG that I, personally, am not going to enjoy much, if at all. Which is why I, personally, am not looking forward to the South Park RPG.
My initial post in this thread was directed at rossrjensen wondering why there's "negativity towards the project". I hope I managed to explain where my negativity comes from.
villain of the story
Watchdog
- Joined
- March 30, 2011
- Messages
- 121
Is that you, mondblut?
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2011
- Messages
- 121
- Joined
- September 16, 2011
- Messages
- 791
Kalos, you've already stated that you don't like South Park, so invariably you won't like a South Park game. There's no point in debating it with you. I enjoy South Park and I think there is plenty of fun that can be had with the South Park RPG.
That being said, I disagree with a lot of what you have stated, particularly how important combat is to making an enjoyable RPG. Isn't weak combat one of the biggest complaints with Skyrim? You dislike the Paper Mario combat system and I can't say much about it since I have never played it, but Paper Mario did receive nearly universal critical and public acclaim.
The most important element to consider with the South Park RPG is that it is satire of the genre! That's the reason why it is using a well-known combat system. It might also be the reason why it has deliberately chosen a simple system. It's the reason it will have materia-like buffs. It's the reason there will be quests and characters to interact with. If you don't like South Park and are just trying to enjoy it for its genre innovations, you probably will not like it. In fact, you might be offended by the ridiculous quests and the way they poke fun at your most beloved video game genre. There's no doubt it is being made for fans.
I think it could be funny and interesting. You don't…well that's okay, plenty of people don't find the show as amusing as I do either. And if what we're really doing is trying to debate whether or not South Park in general is with or without merit, we are going about it the wrong way.
You have explained why you don't like it. Maybe those are the same reasons that other people don't either. However, I find it odd that people have been taking the time to derisively comment on it. I generally ignore the games that I don't have interest in. Are people that offended by its existence??
That being said, I disagree with a lot of what you have stated, particularly how important combat is to making an enjoyable RPG. Isn't weak combat one of the biggest complaints with Skyrim? You dislike the Paper Mario combat system and I can't say much about it since I have never played it, but Paper Mario did receive nearly universal critical and public acclaim.
The most important element to consider with the South Park RPG is that it is satire of the genre! That's the reason why it is using a well-known combat system. It might also be the reason why it has deliberately chosen a simple system. It's the reason it will have materia-like buffs. It's the reason there will be quests and characters to interact with. If you don't like South Park and are just trying to enjoy it for its genre innovations, you probably will not like it. In fact, you might be offended by the ridiculous quests and the way they poke fun at your most beloved video game genre. There's no doubt it is being made for fans.
I think it could be funny and interesting. You don't…well that's okay, plenty of people don't find the show as amusing as I do either. And if what we're really doing is trying to debate whether or not South Park in general is with or without merit, we are going about it the wrong way.
You have explained why you don't like it. Maybe those are the same reasons that other people don't either. However, I find it odd that people have been taking the time to derisively comment on it. I generally ignore the games that I don't have interest in. Are people that offended by its existence??
Last edited:
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2011
- Messages
- 791
KalosKagathos
Watcher
I think Forgotten Realms is a bad setting, yet I really liked Mask of the Betrayer. I'm not a Metal Gear fan, yet Metal Gear Rising is my most anticipated action game at the moment. South Park: The Game being South Park is only a part of the problem in my eyes, and it's not the largest part. It's the direction in which the game seems to be heading that troubles me the most.
Yes, and it's the main reason why I find Bethesda games to be completely unplayable. What point were you even trying to make by bringing up Skyrim?
What of it? Are you going to address any of the issues I raised when I explained why I thought Paper Mario combat was bad, or will you just hide behind the game's sales figures and its Metacritic average?
Final Fantasy V was a parody of the very series it is a part of. That didn't prevent it from featuring the most complex character advancement system in the history of FF. The point is, even if you want to make jokes at the expense of lacking combat systems, you don't need to actually include one in your game.
Trust me, I have no problem with humor in RPGs. I just don't think South Park's particular brand of humor will make a good base for an RPG parody.
Except that's not what we're doing here at all. You asked why not everyone is excited about the South Park RPG, you got your answer. It was not an attack at people who do look forward to the game, just my personal list of reasons for not buying into the hype.
You find it odd that people who post on an RPG site have an opinion to share about a recently announced RPG? Really?
- Joined
- September 16, 2011
- Messages
- 791
*Sigh* You don't need to take an arrogant tone to state your opinion.
Does South Park share much in common with Forgotten Realms or Metal Gear? You don't like the direction that the game is going, but you're missing the point - it is deliberately going that direction as a parody on the genre. It's not trying to break ground. It's satirizing the bombastic nature of RPG's. Have you ever seen a parody - in any form - attempt to break new ground on the genre it is parodying??
Seriously? You quoted exactly the point I was making, it took all of two sentences. You stated that combat was the most important element of a good RPG. Skyrim is, by most accounts (though apparently not yours), a good RPG. Its combat is often referenced as one of its weaknesses. The same is true with many other RPG's. Personally, if I was that concerned with combat, I would be playing more action games. If I was concerned with tactics, I would be playing more strategy games.
No, because as I said (and you should know this, considering you quoted it), I have never played Paper Mario. But, judging from it's sales figures and Metacritic average, either it is an example that 1. for the majority of people combat is not the most important part of a RPG or 2. most people actually liked the combat.
A parody is derived from something else. Final Fantasy V may have had moments of parody, but the entire game wasn't meant to be a parody of the series or of the genre.
South Park RPG, on the other hand, is entirely a parody. South Park RPG is not trying to advance the genre, it's trying to produce some sort of commentary on the genre's hallmarks.
Yes, because, as you stated, you don't like South Park's humor. I would speculate that those who like the game will primarily like it for its humor. And there's nothing wrong with that. I have always been fond of the Secret of Monkey Island for its humor.
No, I asked why people were responding so vehemently towards the project.
Don't play daft with me, I haven't noticed the same level of negativity towards other newer projects, such as Game of Thrones. The people that aren't interested in that project either don't exist, they have kept mum on it, or they ignore it. From what I've seen, and I read the news and comments here regularly, South Park RPG is receiving special treatment.
Does South Park share much in common with Forgotten Realms or Metal Gear? You don't like the direction that the game is going, but you're missing the point - it is deliberately going that direction as a parody on the genre. It's not trying to break ground. It's satirizing the bombastic nature of RPG's. Have you ever seen a parody - in any form - attempt to break new ground on the genre it is parodying??
Seriously? You quoted exactly the point I was making, it took all of two sentences. You stated that combat was the most important element of a good RPG. Skyrim is, by most accounts (though apparently not yours), a good RPG. Its combat is often referenced as one of its weaknesses. The same is true with many other RPG's. Personally, if I was that concerned with combat, I would be playing more action games. If I was concerned with tactics, I would be playing more strategy games.
No, because as I said (and you should know this, considering you quoted it), I have never played Paper Mario. But, judging from it's sales figures and Metacritic average, either it is an example that 1. for the majority of people combat is not the most important part of a RPG or 2. most people actually liked the combat.
A parody is derived from something else. Final Fantasy V may have had moments of parody, but the entire game wasn't meant to be a parody of the series or of the genre.
South Park RPG, on the other hand, is entirely a parody. South Park RPG is not trying to advance the genre, it's trying to produce some sort of commentary on the genre's hallmarks.
Yes, because, as you stated, you don't like South Park's humor. I would speculate that those who like the game will primarily like it for its humor. And there's nothing wrong with that. I have always been fond of the Secret of Monkey Island for its humor.
No, I asked why people were responding so vehemently towards the project.
Don't play daft with me, I haven't noticed the same level of negativity towards other newer projects, such as Game of Thrones. The people that aren't interested in that project either don't exist, they have kept mum on it, or they ignore it. From what I've seen, and I read the news and comments here regularly, South Park RPG is receiving special treatment.
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2011
- Messages
- 791
KalosKagathos
Watcher
I'm not being arrogant. I'm being confident in my personal taste and willing to protect it when I feel doubt is being cast on my right to have it.
Not at all, but that wasn't the point. What I was saying was that even an IP that I don't like can give birth to a game I do. South Park is no exception. However, South Park: The Game is probably not going to be that game.
Uh, I do understand this. What I want to know is how this understanding is supposed to make me like the game. I mean, I also understand why Ubisoft chose to include swearing, gore, heavy metal and unnecessary ass shots in Prince of Persia: Warrior Within. Should I start liking that game too just because I understand how and why it came to be?
I don't want it to break new ground. I want it to deliver solid and fun turn-based combat. Is it something ground-breaking?
I play those too, and RPG combat, at least when done right, is very different from both. It favors the player's ability to properly build characters and compose parties over his reflexes, setting it apart from action games. What makes it different from strategy games is its far smaller scale and significantly higher value of each character you control.
But you weren't asking for the opinion of most people, were you? You wanted to know what people who don't look forward to the South Park RPG think. Well, I can't speak for everyone, but this is what I think, and no amount of people enjoying Paper Mario and Skyrim will alter the priorities I follow when deciding if an RPG is good or not.
Not of the entire genre, but it certainly counts as a parody of the crystal Final Fantasy games (I, III, IV).
You don't need to repeat the genre's mistakes to produce such commentary. You merely need to refer to them.
I never said there was anything wrong with people eagerly anticipating the South Park RPG. I only explained why I wasn't among them.
Again, I don't speak for everyone, but here's my point of view.
The Game of Thrones RPG is being made by Cyanide, the guys responsible for a Blood Bowl ripoff, an actual Blood Bowl game and some Diablo clone I've completely forgotten about and only remembered because I checked the studio's Wikipedia page when writing this post. I do not care about Cyanide. I haven't formed any opinion about the Game of Thrones RPG because I didn't bother to follow the game. I have absolutely no idea what it's like, nor am I particularly eager to find out, since I haven't read a singe George R. R. Martin book either.
The South Park RPG is being made by Obsidian, the last western RPG developer I care about. I wanted them to make a 2D turn-based RPG for a long, long time. Let's just say a South Park RPG with Paper Mario combat was not something I had in mind when I dreamed of this.