CM30 wrote:To be fair, the paper art style has become more pronounced in every game in the series. It was only really 'subtle' in the Nintendo 64 game, the second one introduced paper transformations and made the theme part of the world itself, the next went crazy with 2D to 3D, this one's basically just the next 'logical' step. It's not a mistake made purely by this game, it's a change which slowly got more prominent as the series went on.
But you might have a point. It does seem a lot like Intelligent Systems are getting too obsessed with the 'style' and 'mechanics' of their games rather than the content. Heck, you could say they're getting too obsessed with parodying and making fun of themselves, even Thousand Year Door and Super Paper Mario had a bit much of this (remember chapter 2 in Super Paper Mario and the tedious mini games needed for rupees? Chasing around General White in Thousand Year Door? Clicking through someone saying I love you a hundred times in Thousand Year Door's chapter 6?) Hell, even the art style seems to be getting more and more strange and 'abstract' per game.
Still, I'll wait for the game to come out and someone to upload a walkthrough or something before I comment further.
Basically! You're the only dude who gets what I mean. As for the more pronounced art style, as I said:
The previous games OCCASIONALLY did these things, but it was either a) subtle or b) unexpected but presented in such a way that it never ruined immersion.
So ya, you had stuff like Paper Transformations and silly art style gimmicks, but it was all set-up in a way that make sure it never broke player immersion. And in Super Paper's case, the 2D/3D flipping thing was explained in the story (alternate dimensions caused by doomsday prophecies and arranged marriage).
I did dislike some of that stuff in TTYD and Super Paper as well. I remember seeing Hooktail the first time, and I was like "what the hell...?" because he was literally a paper cut-out. But in TTYD's defense, it was all presented like a theatre drama, so it made sense. It was a more retelling of one of Mario & Luigi's adventures. And Super Paper wasn't a theatre drama, but it was all in the story. The flipping mechanic was due to some inter-dimensional, doomsday prophecy chaos. SS could have saved itself if it had just taken place in another world or something, like maybe Mario got sucked into a sticker book (kinda like the Shy Guy toy box in the first game). Just like how in Epic Yarn, Kirby was in a yarn world, not the real Popstar world.
It does seem a lot like Intelligent Systems are getting too obsessed with[...]'mechanics' of their games rather than the content.
It would be more appropriate to use a more descriptive term like "gimmick mechanics". It's not like the stickers in SS are unique or anything. The same effects could have been achieved with badges, partners and items. Stickers is just an art style and they're making mechanics based on that instead of actual good strategy mechanics, hence the term "gimmick mechanics". But yes, they are too obsessed with the style and gimmicks instead of making better content and actually good strategy gameplay.
DonnyKD wrote:Yeah, I don't think you know what a parody is. And no, most parodies don't suck, unless you're one of those fans with a mighty stick up their butt who gets pissed that they dare make fun of anything in the series.
I probably no what parody is more than you, which is saying a lot since English isn't my first langage and seems to be yours. Just sayin'! And yeah, parodies mostly suck unless they're really, really well done or just take an instance in the actual writing.
Also, lol at calling me a butthurt fan.
a game literally called Paper Mario and has jokes like "BLEECH! WHERE DID YOU LEARN HOW TO COOK!? TRUCK DRIVING SCHOOL!?!" in the first freaking game should take itself seriously.
Okay, and what's your point? What does that have to do with anything? Oh right it doesn't, you're just a really desperate fanboy. Seriously, you shouldn't be playing these games. You obv don't understand them and they're too good for you. People like you with your unsurprisingly low standards and blind fanaticism (which is funny, cause you're not really fans, only in the superficial sense), are bringing down the series.
Paper Mario wasn't and never will be serious in any sense.
And I'm sure you know all the senses of the word.
Fourth-wall breaking is a fucking staple
O rly? I never played any of these games for some stupid writing gimmick. It occasionally popped-up here and there and it was humorous, but a staple? I don't think you what a staple is either.
the game wouldn't be humorous or fun if it turned out that the game series about a flat Italian plumber and his zany multi-species compatriots stopping giant turtles who uses a stick with a star on it thought it was actually a dramatic epic
But that's exactly what it is! I would highly recommend playing the series since it seems like you really haven't. Super Paper is only $20 now and you can often find buy 1 get 1 deals for all Nintendo Select titles. TTYD might be a bit harder to come by, but the first Paper Mario is available on the VC for a mere $10. I highly recommend these games if you enjoy the Mario universe and it's characters.
Unless of course you HAVE played them. But from the looks of it, you've only played them in the most superficial, glazey-eyed way a rabbid fanatic would (i.e. just beating it so you can say "I beat it!"). In that case, you can read up all about the games in more detail on the Super Mario Wiki. Here, I'll link them since I'm nice:http://www.mariowiki.com/Paper_Mario#Storylinehttp://www.mariowiki.com/Paper_Mario:_T ... _Door#Plothttp://www.mariowiki.com/Super_Paper_Mario#Story
And if that is too much reading for you Homer Simpson-like attention span, than you can just watch it on Youtube (sorry, but I'm not linking that for you) or y'know, actually play the games beyond just "omg gotta beat this so i can be A Fan!!1!". I'm surprise how you even manage to complete the games (assuming you did). I mean, they're not exceptionally taxing or anything, but looking at how much difficulty you have in some basic reading comp, you'd probably starve to the death if there wasn't something readily available in your refrigerator.
MoldyClay wrote: MegaShock100 wrote:
Overused image is overused! Btw, you haven't actually refuted any of my concerns. Not only that, but that's the wrong picture to use. I'm not mindlessly complaining like "LOLOL Nintendo is for teh kiddiez and Halo suxxorz" because it's the cool thing to do, which is what that picture was targeting. And please
, I've probably played, analyzed and understood these games more than you. I'm not the one who says stuff like "2D Mario is the same game with different levels!". But I AM glad you posted that picture because it only proves my point:
I recently saw the opera Don Giovanni and at some point (like 2/3rds in), one of the characters looks at the screen and breaks the 4th wall, but only for an instant. It didn't ruin immersion because it was presented so well and it was alright because Don Giovanni is a well-written piece. It, like the past Paper Mario titles, doesn't rely on literary gimmicks and lolrandom humor to capture the audiences. It uses great writing with some MOMENTARY silliness inserted at APPROPRIATE, NON-IMMERSION BREAKING instances. When I saw that it didn't pull me right out of the game world like Hooktail almost did and SS most likely will quite often. It was like "haha that was clever" and that's it. Furthermore, Super Paper didn't rely on any of that crap to sell itself. SS, however, has stuff like "Hey guise, look at this: it's called STICKER star so everthing is the stickers! Look at the Toads stick themselves and create a stairscase, isn't that so hilarious LOLOLOOL" and you have people posting images of some stupid goat and saying stuff like "better than partners".
KingBroly wrote:There are concerns people have about this Paper Mario game.
#1 - no Partners. No partners means a lot of clever and funny writing that were in previous Paper Mario games may be either downplayed significantly or not exist at all. This a major reason as to why people enjoy them so much.
#2 - no Partners. Without a partner battle system, the game may lack a lot of strategy and depth, which Super Paper Mario lacked.
For the record, Super Paper is the best Paper Mario game. The first two games were great experiences, but really, they were mediocre game for numerous reason, but one really big one: waaaaaay too easy.
Anyone with any competence at playing games could easily block like 95% of the enemy attacks and rack up some insane damage with the rather simple rhythm-timing combat system. Being too easy is a sin for any game, especially a strategy game. If the game is too easy, there is no need for any strategic thought required, consequently making it a depth-less. M&L series is much better in this regard, because the battles actually get tougher and the combat system requires some actual skill to pull off the more crazy combos. Super Paper does whatever it does, much, MUCH better than the first two Paper Mario games do turn-based strategy. Fans obv say that Super Paper lacks the "charm" and "personality" and other meaningless terms, but given a choice between a good game and a good experience, I will ALWAYS pick the former. That's bs anyways because Super Paper has just as much, arguably more charm than the first two games and it had much better gameplay and more depth than them as well.
And this brings me to SS. SS might end up being an amazing GAME, but a shovel experience. If that's the case, than I can mostly forgive it's thematic screw-ups. But I doubt it since it relies mostly on gimmick mechanics and it's basically a dumbed down version of the first two Paper Marios (which are mediocre to begin with). The experience elements that look so bad are just adding spice to the wound.
And also, bringing in racism to the equation about what a game is will get you a Warning/Banned if you go far enough.
How that is racism? You never mentioned anything in the Bayonetta thread. Furthermore it's true. I'm not saying Japanese sensibilities, as in ALL Japanese developers have this quality, just that many of them do, and I have more than enough evidence to prove it. I would never want a Western dev to touch a Nintendo IP unless it was someone like Retro who are being closely monitored by Nintendo. Not just Nintendo, but I wouldn't want ANY good Japanese IP touched by Western devs because they just wouldn't understand how the game works. Had there ever been an instance where the Western take on an IP was better than the Japanese? Retro's an exception that proves the rule. Likewise, I wouldn't want any great Western IP touched by a Japanese developer. Now obv, there are generlizations and they COULD be done right, but as I said, they're generalizations. Like I wouldn't mind seeing God of War being designed by Platinum. The story might be stupid (which isn't saying much cause GoW has a shovel story and characters anyway), but the gameplay would be infinitely better than what GoW has ever had. And there are plenty of cases where "Japanese sensibility" was a bad thing (Other M, all those generic anime stories in RPGs). All I'm saying is that in general, I wouldn't want most western designers touching a Japanese game. You can see this in comments on message boards as well. Imagine Mario designed by a westerner studio. Instead of solid gameplay mechanics and respect for the themes, they'd probably be like "LOL yeah Mario's all about the LSD acid-trip wierd shovel and that's what the fans want! We're so geniuses!!". Except that's not what the fans want. That might be what the more superficial gamers think and want, but not the REAL FANS. And then we'll end up with some awful fan-parody in the same vein as Contra 4.
"Haha we made a game like Contra! Blowing shovel up is good old 80s arcade-style fun. Remember when we thought that was cool!!"
Well it still is and blowing shovel up was only a superficial element of the overall pleasure I get from playing Contra. Most of that pleasure comes from that fact that's maybe, I dunno, it's A GOOD GAME?