1 Game 1 Cup: New South Park: The Stick Of Truth Trailer

A cup of fart gets me out of bed in the morning.

I love the way South Park: The Stick of Truth looks just like the TV Show. I know the show has been animated on computers for years, but imitating its 2D animation so perfectly is a greater magic trick than anything performed by Battlefield 4.

Speaking of magic tricks. Come watch this latest trailer about how to cup and throw one in the other new Obsidian RPG.

The script for the game is being written by Matt Stone and Trey Parker, the creators of the TV show, and it’s going to be interesting to see how the game’s equal-opportunity-offensiveness translates to a different context.

South Park was a controversial TV show that convinced moral critics to leave it alone by, often enough, finding a line of smart satire to counter the parts that were crude or appalling. Videogames that have tried the same – to offend, be funny, and have a point all at the same time – have traditionally failed by not being funny and not having an intelligent point to make.

The Stick of Truth could be funny, have a point, and hit the same targets as the TV series, but there’s already a line in the trailer above that made me tense up far more than I would have while watching the show. It’ll be interesting to see the response to the game, because different mediums are in different stages and the same language can have different connotations when used in different places.

I laughed at the fart jokes, though.

The game is out March 7th 2014 and I’m not sure what’s more surprising: that there might be a good South Park game, or that the delays it’s experienced while changing publisher from the defunct THQ might mean that Obsidian have finally been given enough time to release a licensed game that isn’t buggy.


  1. bar10dr says:

    South Park IS a controversial TV show, its still running.

    • Baines says:

      South Park is a TV show. I don’t know that it is still controversial. Other than the various news about The Stick of Truth’s fate, I don’t know that I’ve even heard anyone talk about South Park for years other than in a “Wait, that show is still on?” or “Like the Simpsons, it should have ended years ago.”

    • RedViv says:

      South Park WAS a controversial etcetera

    • bstard says:

      Anyway I LOLed at the way Southpark advertised this game at the end of the past triple episode.

  2. Gap Gen says:

    It does seem to get the show pitch-perfect, although it just showed the tutorial so I don’t know how that pans out for more gamey sections.

    Also I love that developers are starting to go back to 2D; stuff like Rayman Legends looks far better than it would in full 3D (I’m aware that it has 3D models in it), and this looks far more like a South Park game than the FPS that showed up on the N64 a while ago.

    • DrScuttles says:

      Wasn’t there also a South Park kart racer on the N64 around the same sort of time? Did I just make that up? Or did I just give some publisher a terrible idea?

    • PopeRatzo says:

      Also I love that developers are starting to go back to 2D

      Why? In what way is 2D superior?

      • DuneTiger says:

        I wouldn’t say 2D is superior, but I do feel that there is plenty of room for 2D. Like hand-drawn cartoons, there’s a certain artistry that comes along with the very best 2D games (and severe lack thereof in the very worst) of any era. Recently, most of my gaming has been gravitating towards 2D as I find I’m drawn to more indie titles and platformers than megareleases. I think games like Guacamelee, Valdis Story, Risk of Rain, and several others find their feet better in the 2D world than had they gone the route of 3D. To this extent, it would all work in 2.5D as well, but that seems to be difficult for many devs to manage.

        I like that it’s more prominent these days than it has been in a long time and it certainly hasn’t hurt modern 3D gaming, either. There are just gametypes that can be explored better in 2D than in 3D, and vice versa.

        • Jockie says:

          Well 2D is generally cheaper to produce, but I think the main advantage of 2D is that animation is a lot easier, so while 2D might not be be ‘better’ per-se, it’s generally a lot easier to create mods etc for games that don’t require complex animations if you want to add units, characters, enemies etc. Or I dunno, you could just pallete swap everything and pretend that’s new content.

          edit: It just dawned on me after posting this, that I actually know sweet FA about animation and graphics, so this post is purely conjecture/things cleverer people have said elsewhere.

          Also, it feels like there is a whole generation of games that is now pretty much unbearably ugly, due to the ‘everything must be 3D ‘ phase of the late nineties/early noughties. Older games with hand-drawn backgrounds and characters hold up a lot better than a lot of the jagged edges and simple models used in that era.

          • MichaelGC says:

            Shamus Young (of Twenty Sided) has been posting recently about a 2D game he’s currently developing, and he’s commented that 2D game development is “like programming in Easy Mode.”

      • SillyWizard says:

        I generally still find movement in 3D space to be clunky and awkward (and in the game).

        I tend to look at it like this: the more simplistic the elements in a game are, the more freedom I have to use my imagination to interpret stimuli in a more self-satisfying way. The closer things come to reality, the less freedom I have to put myself in a game’s imagination-space.

        I think that’s a lot of the reason why the early Legends of Zelda for me had much more impact than the more detailed iterations.

        Same thing with the Final Fantasy series. Same thing with Fire Emblem. Same thing with any number of titles. (This is by no means a hard and fast rule. Front Mission 3 is head-and-shoulders better than the preceding titles in the series.)

        As a kid I used to daydream fantastical scenarios for the pieces as I played games of chess. The more basic a game is, the more likely I am to lose myself in its world, and more importantly, invite that world into my brainmeets for totally personal funtimes (to a degree: Nibbles and Pong did not inspire the same sort of mental exercise).

        3D can go suck an egg!

    • Shooop says:

      2D being better like most things in game design is entirely situational. Rayman handles it perfectly, but good luck finding anyone who thinks Duke Nukem was better as a 2D platformer than an FPS.

      I’d be happier seeing developers pushing the boundaries with both and knowing when one’s better to use than the other instead of them just flocking back to 2D.

      • darkChozo says:

        I prefer Duke Nukem as a 2D platformer! Then again, I’ve only played Duke Nukem 1 and 2, so who cares about me.

    • pilouuuu says:

      I think it’s absurd how the industry moved towards 3d and forgot about 2d. Both have their place and 2d allows for different gameplay and aesthetic choices. It’s great that they are doing 2d games again.

  3. Don Reba says:

    Oh, my, already with the rape joke outrage. The horror!

    And, of course, surely, the PC version is superior to XBox and Playstation. Is there multiplayer?

    • MuscleHorse says:

      Stop fishing for outrage. He merely said that the moment made him uncomfortable, as it did for me. The way that snippet was presented was as if the line was funny in of itself, which it really wasn’t.

      • Don Reba says:

        Sure it is funny in and of itself. There is no reason for a kid not to ask “how bad did they rape you.” It’s the kind of frivolous thing that might shock one’s grandma, and Graham makes it out as the primary thing to be addressed in “the response” to the game.

        • RedViv says:

          And there is no conceivable way for anybody to feel uncomfortable hearing that! So it’s totally another of these Snuggly John Walker propagenda thingies! Down with that!

        • 00000 says:

          transitive verb
          to defeat another person in any form of competitive activity
          “[The players in the] bottom lane got raped.”

          update your dictionaries

          What strikes me as odd, is that this connotation is a lot more prevalent in video-games (as a competitive activity) then in any other medium. Yet the articles implies it’s more likely to be a no-no joke because it’s a game.

          • Ich Will says:

            LOL, you were raped in the bottom lane.

          • Sheng-ji says:

            And, MOBA, sorry, I mean SAUSAGES players are constantly surprised when people describe their communities as toxic and how no-one accepts them as a real sport.

            This is why.

          • stupid_mcgee says:

            @ 00000: Pardon me if I don’t take to heart a linguistics lesson from someone who can’t differentiate between than and then.

            Also, the gaming usage of rape comes from its other, already established, meaning:

            2) spoil or destroy (a place):

            2) the wanton destruction or spoiling of a place or area:

            See? When you’re saying that you “raped” someone in a game, you’re saying that you completely destroyed them. And it’s not a new concept nor even a new take on the word. It’s just used because it’s often viewed as offensive and denigrating.

            @ Sheng-ji: You’re very much right. However, it’s not just the toxic language that’s holding back e-sports, it’s a predominant attitude, across the board, of purely juvenile and often arrested-development-type behavior.

            Today, gaming is mostly populated by the 25-35 demographic. You’d never really know it, though, as a significant portion of the gaming community acts like 8-year olds with serious emotional and social developmental problems. It’s a drastic case of arrested development and it’s widely prevalent in gaming, and even in the pro circuits of these games.

            Admittedly, there are plenty of upstanding players out there. However, I often feel that for every single standup player, there’s at least 10 or 20 that are just absolute brats. The again, maybe that’s true of sports in general…

          • Sheng-ji says:

            There’s plenty of upstanding players at the top – they need to be or risk their sponsorship but the problem seems to be the transition between pro and the amateur is so disjointed. Very few people join a team or a club – whereas in most traditional sports, most people do, and with that club or team comes community guidelines and risk of expulsion for unacceptable behaviour. Imagine saying “I just raped you” to an opponent you beat in a martial arts sparring session – you would be booted out of your club that night – and for good reason, it’s unacceptable to talk to people like that.

            Now if people just sparred with each other spontaneously in the park, I have no doubt this is how people would behave, remove the social pressure add the anonymity the internet provides and you have possibly e-sports biggest problem. It may not seem like a problem to the people like the two above who clearly don’t mind talking to others like that, the problem comes when their sport is passed up again and again by major sponsorship deals – could you imagine a bank or a mobile phone company putting money into the sport right now, and trust me, it’s what I do for a living, they put more money into a single sports team, like McLaren than is in the entire of e-sports as a whole right now.

            If e-sports wants legitimacy, they need to drive out childishness and this is a prime example. I want e-sports to be more legitimate, I love watching starcraft myself, and could certainly see myself wanting to watch other games.

        • The Random One says:

          I didn’t know Graham had made it out as the primary thing to be addressed in “the response” to the game in some other piece he also wrote. I’m glad that in this one he only mentions it off-handedly in the broader context of how the show’s humor doesn’t always hit its target.

      • Big Murray says:

        Knowing Stone and Parker, I can already tell that the rape line is going to be a joke about video-game culture using the word rape gratuitously.

        The real test will be if gamers and non-gamers actually get that it is.

      • Strangerator says:

        If you think that is bad, you should have seen this one episode where they joked about child murder. I believe the character’s name was Kenny…

    • Kubrick Stare Nun says:

      People arguing about tasteless humour on a South Park game!


    • Press X to Gary Busey says:

      The series is ripe with rape jokes. Two examples; George Lucas and Stephen Spielberg raping Indiana Jones and a Storm Trooper comes to mind. There’s also the episode where they send Kurt Russel through the Stargate into imagination land where cuddly animals rape him “Oh god they are raping me and it hurts!”.

      • Jackablade says:

        That’s probably something more interesting to pullout of this.
        “…there’s already a line in the trailer above that made me tense up far more than I would have while watching the show.”

        That strikes me as curious. If you’re offended by rape references or jokes (which is a pretty reasonable), why is one appearing in a game worse than one appearing on the television series. The one in the trailer looks to be a non interactive cutscene, and the line is spoken by Cartmen, not the player, so there should, as far as I’m concerned, be little difference between the two.

  4. Alexander says:

    RPS has finally made that reference in the title.

    Game’s looking good, in the SP context of “good”.

  5. Emeraude says:

    Any news on the DRM front ?

  6. Solidstate89 says:

    Of course, had you watched the last 3 episodes of South Park, you’d realize what the back story is for this game.

    • KevinLew says:

      I watched all three episodes of South Park, and I doubt that it has much tie-in to The Stick of Truth. Especially since the end of the series shows Xbox “winning” the console wars, and this game is available on the PS3.

      • 00000 says:

        Watch the ending again. Afterwards, go outside and find your own stick of truth to play with.

        • Solidstate89 says:

          And then Butters says something inappropriate in regards to the release date, which I can’t tell if it’s simply just making fun of South Park, or making fun of Obsidian – or both.

    • HothMonster says:

      Which is funny because they write and animate the show the week before it airs so it it makes me wonder if the game inspired the episodes or if they have been sitting on that plotline for a year. Probably the later based on the original release date but I guess we be able to tell once we play the game.

      • stupid_mcgee says:

        I remember reading an interview where Trey and Matt said that they have mountains of old material that they haven’t used. They file it away (the good stuff, that is) in case they can use it for something later on. IIRC, the South Park movie was originally an episode idea that kept growing and growing, so they eventually decided to do a full movie. Imaginationland was originally going to be a movie to be released in theatres (they actually had originally started rendering it for IMax and stuff), but they decided against that and split it up into episodes.

        While it is true that they begin producing the episode the week before it needs to air, that doesn’t always include writing. They might have changed this, but about 5 or so years ago they talked about how they usually write half of each season’s episodes ahead of time, and the other half were to be written the week before airing. This allows them a buffer so they won’t always be scrambling to come up with an idea at the last minute, but it still allows them to slip in more recent references into episodes that may have been written months ago.

  7. Kubrick Stare Nun says:

    “Videogames that have tried the same – to offend, be funny, and have a point all at the same time – have traditionally failed by not being funny and not having an intelligent point to make. ”

    Part of the reason GTA is so awesome.

  8. BreadBitten says:

    “Videogames that have tried the same – to offend, be funny, and have a point all at the same time – have traditionally failed by not being funny and not having an intelligent point to make…”

    I think the closest video games have to an equivalent of South Park is post-3D Grand Theft Auto. It’s quite inconsistent in it’s quality at times but when the satire in the games strikes a chord, it’s often biting and genuinely funny…not unlike South Park.

  9. lautalocos says:

    and why is everyone excited about this game? this is the first piece of gameplay i´ve ever seen. doesnt impress my in the slightest.

    • horus_lupercal says:

      I’m looking forward to the game as, based on the footgage i’ve seen so far, it seems to be a turn based rpg-lite that’s captured the tone of the series pretty darn well. I’m basing that mainly on the Giggling Donkey gameplay footage released about 6 weeks ago – link to youtube.com

      It won’t be everyones cup of tea but that’s life.

      • lautalocos says:

        that looks better, but still, nothing impressive, at least for me.

        • horus_lupercal says:

          As is your preogative good sir, the world would be rather boring if we all liked the same things :-)

    • Press X to Gary Busey says:

      Perhaps it’s South Park fans who are excited about the game and not “everyone”? You’re probably not excited because you aren’t a SP fan? Fan-excitation mechanics of game tie-ins to franchises and IP’s since forever.
      There’s been plenty of shit SP games but this one is the first where the creators are directly involved AFAIK. And Trey Parker is a console RPG fan so we’ll see (he mentions Earthbound, Legend of Zelda, Paper Mario and Skyrim as influences).

    • Big Murray says:

      If the South Park creators have brought their A-game to the table, then this could be a very interesting game all round. A funny satirical video-game is a rare thing.

      And I know we all like to rip on South Park for not being as good as it used to, but let’s not forget that these guys wrote The Book of Mormon recently. They’re good.

      • Dominare says:

        Virtually no TV show is ‘as good as it used to be’. That often has nothing to do with the actual quality of said show, its just that the novelty has worn off. This is the same reason that having sex with a chick you’ve been dating for six months isn’t generally as good as having sex with one you just met yesterday. She didn’t get ‘worse at sex’, you’re just used to her (and her to you of course).