South Park: The Stick of Truth (PRE-RELEASE DISCUSSION)

[Outmind]

I said guessing, not betting.

 

[Roguey]

For $60 it better be at least 20 hours long, and I'd hope for something more like 30-40. Especially considering how long it's been in development.

There are a lot of $60 games that are 5-10 hours long.

What do you want to spend so many hours doing? There's only so much dialogue they can write, and so much combat they can create until it becomes a chore.

 

[Deleted member 7219]

For $60 it better be at least 20 hours long, and I'd hope for something more like 30-40. Especially considering how long it's been in development.

There are a lot of $60 games that are 5-10 hours long.

What do you want to spend so many hours doing? There's only so much dialogue they can write, and so much combat they can create until it becomes a chore.

Like what? Call of Duty? Yes. What RPGs can you name that are 5-10 hours long? The most recent (and only) example I can think of is Shadowrun Returns, and that was made by an indie studio (not Obsidian).

 

[Roguey]

Like what? Call of Duty? Yes. What RPGs can you name that are 5-10 hours long? The most recent (and only) example I can think of is Shadowrun Returns, and that was made by an indie studio (not Obsidian).

Why should something with role playing be significantly longer than something that doesn't have role playing?

 

[Edward_R_Murrow]

Why should something with role playing be significantly longer than something that doesn't have role playing?

The whole "RPGs have to be >40 hours" meme mystifies me. A lot of RPG elements don't play particularly well with enormously long games.

"Choice and consequence" seems better suited to shorter titles when resources are constrained. Devs can only create so many branching scenarios, so longer C&C games are likely to be loaded up with filler. Compare lean games like Fallout, Way of the Samurai, or the AoD demo to Fallout 2, New Vegas, or Arcanum. Which set had the player interacting with the game's reactivity more often in their playtime? Which had a bunch of banalshitboring combat maps and fetchquesting?

Character development systems tend to cordon off a good deal of the game mechanics in any given playthrough. The player won't have access to the full set, merely one of more subsets. And these mechanical subsets aren't often robust enough on their own to stay interesting for extended periods of play. Playing a stealthy character in an (action) RPG is relatively one dimensional compared to playing a dedicated stealth game and a combat-centric playstyle is often totally inferior to a true action game. Without deep mechanics to fall back on, designers have to rely solely on content. But the demand for length hampers them as well. There's only so much a team can do to make 40+ hours worth of content interesting for multiple, distinct styles of play. Basically, this is why many RPGs tend towards party-based killfests; the player can build in such a way as to have access to a majority (or all) of the game's mechanics, choosing the concentration of each subset within the party (going heavy/light on physical strength, magic, skills, etc). And content is pretty easy to make varied and interesting.

Really, shorter, more content-dense RPGs would be a good thing. But it seems so ingrained in people's minds that RPG equals "really long playtime" because...I dunno...game journos excreting shitmemes for years on end?

 

[DeepOcean]

Why should something with role playing be significantly longer than something that doesn't have role playing?

Call of Duty has multiplayer where most people spend ridiculous amounts of time, it isn't 60 dollars for 5 hours. The five hours of CoD is full of scripting, railroaded and don't have down time at all, those aren't characteristic of RPGs in general that aren't so densely compacted in their content (in case of CoD if you consider explosions content), 5 hours on a RPG is only achievable if you strip any kind of exploration on it like Shadowrun Returns or turn it on the equivalent of a demo of a bigger RPG.If Shadowrun returns had side content on it, it could had easily reached way more than 10 hours. A short RPG like that is doable but try to convince people to fork 60 dollars on a short, linear and railroaded RPG without any kind of multiplayer content.

Besides, other genres are more focused on one aspect, you get there and the experience start immediatly, as soon as you start you are shooting dudes and the rhythm is way faster. RPGs require you to explore a little, have some down time to learn how things work, adapt yourself with where things are and get to know the world and characters. You can get a shorter RPG but it won't be the same thing as a proper one and surely not worth 60 dollars.

 

[Infinitron]

More lengthfaggotry?

I'll say it again: If you're the type of person who worries about RPGs being too short, you probably aren't going to finish any RPG in a short time. I mean, you never hear about speedrunners wanting a game to be long. It's always the people who already take their sweet time in games who want games to be long. Not surprising, because that's the type of experience they enjoy, but they don't realize it has as much or more to do with their playstyle than it does with the actual amount of content in the games they're playing.

 

[Avellion]

I would rather have a game that is 5-20 hours long (Fallout 1, 2) than a game that feels like it is really long, but is awfully padded out with interesting content being far in between each other and most of the content being the copy paste (Dragon Age: Origins). RPGs should only be as long as the content can take them and if it is clear that they are running out of ideas, said content might be better off if it is not implemented, and I do not classify filler as content. A dungeon or a scenario that has 3 or more ways to tackle them but can completed within 15 minutes is a lot more memorable and enjoyable than a longass dungeon crawl with only one approach and that being fighting the same copy pasted encounter for 2 hours.

If they make South Park: The Stick of Truth good throughout the entire experience and I WILL replay it at least once. Ironically, that way the game would also last me longer than if they had padded it out, because if it had been padded out I would probably quit the game after 10 hours if I feel the game is just out to waste my time.

 

[Eyeball]

They have spent years making this game. They've delayed it several times. Why would it only be 10 hours long?

Because it's a shameless Cash grab based on a popular yet stale franchise with linear JRPG mechanics as the framework, that's why.

 

[Morgoth]

Or because story dictates game length.... Perhaps Trey and Matt simply didn't have more to say, and saw a 10 hour storyline as a perfect fit for their particular game's vision.

 

[Duraframe300]

The game let's you free-roam South Park immediatly after the opening.

 

[Infinitron]

linear JRPG mechanics as the framework

I don't know about Paper Mario, but traditionally JRPGs have been pretty long games. Linear or non-linear.

 

[Akratus]

Mechanics, infinitron.

 

[Infinitron]

Mechanics, infinitron.

Eyeball said in response to Matt's post that "linear JRPG mechanics" are the reason the game will be short. I don't think that makes sense either, but I humored him.

 

[Eyeball]

No, the JRPG mechanics blatantly ripped off from better titles is just more supporting evidence it's a bullshit Cash grab.

 

[Infinitron]

No, the JRPG mechanics blatantly ripped off from better titles is just more supporting evidence it's a bullshit Cash grab.

Ah. In that case, I think the game has been in development for way too long at this point to be classified as a cash grab.

If it was a one year development time licensed shovelware that would be a different story, but Matt and Trey seem to be making an effort here.

 

[Rake]

All this whining because someone doesn't like SouthPark and JRPG mechanics. That doesn't make the game cash grab.
Fallout New Vegas was a cash grab, but no one complained then because hey, Fallout

 

[Kem0sabe]

This is going to be awesome, the only thing that can make this better is cocaine...

 

[Duraframe300]

From the destructoid preview

Battles can be pretty challenging, even early ones. I was overwhelmed by a group of elves at one point and was wiped out after missing the timing on blocks from a group of archers.

Also Kotaku got lost and didn't know what to do.

 

[Infinitron]

Post links and quotes.

 

[Duraframe300]

You know those moments in RPG/Adventure games where it feels as though the developer just gives you absolutely nothing to go on, and the only way you can = progress is by complete luck, or by randomly spamming every move in your arsenal until something works? I have a bad feeling South Park: The Stick Of Truth could be full of those moments.

Plenty of times during my hour with the game the Ubisoft representative felt compelled to tell me how to progress, and in these situations the solution always felt hopeless contrived. Like I would have had no idea unless someone explained precisely what I was supposed to do. It felt completely out of place.

http://www.kotaku.com.au/2014/02/i-...he-stick-of-truth-and-here-are-some-thoughts/

Now this could be a valid complaint. But, since other previews didn't seem to mention that I expect the explanation to be on Kotaku's side.

Btw. Does this game possibly have no quest compass?

 

[Akratus]

It's not in the first person, so I don't see a TES style compass working in the same way.

By the way, how did they handle world travel in a 2d sidescroller like this? A world overview map, or a certain travel system?

 

[Infinitron]

It's not a sidescroller.

 

[SuicideBunny]

It's not a sidescroller.

eeeeeh.. it kinda is a typical beat'em up sidescroller perspective with little depth/width and a lot of sidescrolling length to maps...

 

[J_C]

All this whining because someone doesn't like SouthPark and JRPG mechanics. That doesn't make the game cash grab.
Fallout New Vegas was a cash grab, but no one complained then because hey, Fallout

Clear example that people don't know what cash grab is, but try to be edgy by calling the games a cash grab, or slam dunk.

It's not a sidescroller.

eeeeeh.. it kinda is a typical beat'em up sidescroller perspective with little depth/width and a lot of sidescrolling length to maps...

Well they made it clear that they wanted to look like the show, and it is exactly like that. Mainly sidescrolling parts, but you can go up and down in the maps.