Paprium: The Official Thread Mk 2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SEGA-Jorge

As far as St1ka's review, I completely respect his opinion, but I think calling Paprium the best 16-bit beat em up is giving it way too much credit. It happened in a weird vaccum, in a time where the devs didn't have much, if any, barriers during the development process. There's no alternate reality where Paprium could have come out in the 90's. There was no way to justify the price of components and 8 year dev cycle. If anything, Paprium not being better in every conceivable way after 30 years of time, dev knowledge, hardware price reduction, and ability to produce carts relatively inexpensively, and not having to pay any licensing fees, only shows how comically bad the dev cycle for Paprium was. Sega and Ancient made SoR2 in the 90's along with all the barriers and challenges a dev team would face at the time. They were able to meet rom size requirements, completed the game in a reasonable dev cycle, and delivered what is still, 25+ years later, one of, if not the greatest 2d beat 'em up ever made, period, let alone on a 16-bit console. Give Sega/Ancient the same time and budget and access to tech that WM had, and their games would have been that much better.

---

Thank you! You've pretty much summarised everything I wanted to say regarding St1ka's review.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goati

And I've seen people play it over and over again, even though it's clearly not that good, and there's nothing wrong with that either.

---

Correct me if I’m wrong but this statement suggests you have yet to play it and herein lies the problem: most who have received their copies (but certainly not all) seem to have the opinion that yes it is flawed but ultimately still an enjoyable game. The harshest criticism seems to stem from those who haven’t played it. How can this be a balanced debate? I guess we won’t know until the shipping debacle has been cleared up.

I do feel that Fonzie’s quite frankly atrocious business practices and terrible customer service is resulting in a lot of salt. If this was developed by Bitmap Bureau or Big Evil with all their fantastic updates, feedback, fairly accurate timescales and future multi-platform releases then I have no doubt everyone and their dog would be gushing over the many positive and even groundbreaking aspects of the game whilst of course still acknowledging it is not perfect.

It’s hard to be objective with all that’s gone on and continues to go on with many not having received their copy, refunds not yet issued, and Project N still in limbo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goati

I personally enjoy lots of bad games but if somebody is giving their opinion (and I know Vludi's experience in the genre), no need to get personal and defensive, especially over such a controversial game that is going to attract all kinds of critics.
It's a videogame in the end so as long as you have fun with it it's good, it's just funny when you read stuff like 'paprium is good' or 'you can jumpkick through most beat 'em ups'.

---

I agree with most of what you said here apart from the inference that Paprium is a bad game which to me it is not. The whole MO of video games is to have fun, and unlike Vludi I am really enjoy playing Paprium. I guess that must mean I don’t understand beat ‘em ups despite having grown up on a diet of them for the last 35 years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vludi

You should care for good gameplay on games that aren't just fighting/multiplayer, just sayin'

---

You already know that I play games because their good gameplay from our previous discussions. If they do not have it, I check their story sections on YT or listen to their soundtracks as long as they are good. Otherwise I am not bothered at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by molasar

You already know that I play games because their good gameplay from our previous discussions.

---

That's just what you said, can't say I'm very convinced lol. Let's see, you mentioned old-school single-plane beat 'em ups as an argument to the genre being somewhat basic/mindless, justifying Paprium's mediocrity, but even something like Kung-fu master offers more depth and challenge than Paprium, going for a high-score in that game is certainly more rewarding than spamming your way thru the pointless content of Fonzie's bloated masterpiece.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crazyteknohed

Correct me if I’m wrong but this statement suggests you have yet to play it and herein lies the problem: most who have received their copies (but certainly not all) seem to have the opinion that yes it is flawed but ultimately still an enjoyable game. The harshest criticism seems to stem from those who haven’t played it. How can this be a balanced debate? I guess we won’t know until the shipping debacle has been cleared up.

I do feel that Fonzie’s quite frankly atrocious business practices and terrible customer service is resulting in a lot of salt. If this was developed by Bitmap Bureau or Big Evil with all their fantastic updates, feedback, fairly accurate timescales and future multi-platform releases then I have no doubt everyone and their dog would be gushing over the many positive and even groundbreaking aspects of the game whilst of course still acknowledging it is not perfect.

It’s hard to be objective with all that’s gone on and continues to go on with many not having received their copy, refunds not yet issued, and Project N still in limbo.



I agree with most of what you said here apart from the inference that Paprium is a bad game which to me it is not. The whole MO of video games is to have fun, and unlike Vludi I am really enjoy playing Paprium. I guess that must mean I don’t understand beat ‘em ups despite having grown up on a diet of them for the last 35 years.

---

He's played it over and over again. Your assumption is totally wrong: https://twitter.com/Goatistream/stat...73253989683202

It is of course possible for people to genuinely enjoy things that are objectively bad. There is such a thing as a guilty pleasure. But I wouldn't label Paprium as that. I'd say it's firmly within the "good but flawed" category, a solid 7/10 game. I wish its AI were more challenging and that there was more variety in the combat, but lacking that does not make it a bad game. Or a bad beat-em-up for that matter. It may not live up to the lofty standards held up by some fans of the genre, but it makes up for its flaws in other departments and the end result is still a highly enjoyable brawler.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crazyteknohed

I do feel that Fonzie’s quite frankly atrocious business practices and terrible customer service is resulting in a lot of salt. If this was developed by Bitmap Bureau or Big Evil with all their fantastic updates, feedback, fairly accurate timescales and future multi-platform releases then I have no doubt everyone and their dog would be gushing over the many positive and even groundbreaking aspects of the game whilst of course still acknowledging it is not perfect.

---

You make a good point here. For example I was not particularly blown away by Tanglewood. I saw the previews, I played the demo, I watched other people play it. It's a competently made game with some interesting ideas and decent execution, but nothing that thoroughly amazed me. However simply because Big Evil Corp has been so open about their development process and put so much effort into making sure everyone would be able to play it, that has generated a lot of goodwill that made people look much more favorably upon the game as well. So it works both ways. It is almost impossible to truly appreciate Paprium for what it is, just because everything surrounding it has been such a shitshow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vludi

That's just what you said, can't say I'm very convinced lol. Let's see, you mentioned old-school single-plane beat 'em ups as an argument to the genre being somewhat basic/mindless, justifying Paprium's mediocrity, but even something like Kung-fu master offers more depth and challenge than Paprium, going for a high-score in that game is certainly more rewarding than spamming your way thru the pointless content of Fonzie's bloated masterpiece.

---

Lol. I am not trying to convince you. There is a reason why I like Capcom's AvP, Return of Double Dragon, Golden Axe III and Bare Knuckle III the most. Paprium joined them as well and it is not mediocre as you stated. Also I do not justify anything.
Paprium is a great combination of gameplay and audiovisuals. The latter, you think, does not add to playability. In regards to Kung-fu master I never cared about it or high score. First beat'em up/fighting games that impressed with its combinations of gameplay and audiovisuals were Double Dragon II Arcade and International Karate. Also spamming your way thru is perhaps your choice but not mine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by molasar

In regards to Kung-fu master I never cared about it or high score.

---

Irrelevant, I'm talking about the game's quality which is good despite being old, unlike Paprium.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by molasar

Also spamming your way thru is perhaps your choice but not mine.

---

Feel free to post your max difficulty runs without jump kick spams, would be fun to watch actually lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SEGA-Jorge

As far as St1ka's review, I completely respect his opinion, but I think calling Paprium the best 16-bit beat em up is giving it way too much credit. It happened in a weird vaccum, in a time where the devs didn't have much, if any, barriers during the development process. There's no alternate reality where Paprium could have come out in the 90's. There was no way to justify the price of components and 8 year dev cycle. If anything, Paprium not being better in every conceivable way after 30 years of time, dev knowledge, hardware price reduction, and ability to produce carts relatively inexpensively, and not having to pay any licensing fees, only shows how comically bad the dev cycle for Paprium was. Sega and Ancient made SoR2 in the 90's along with all the barriers and challenges a dev team would face at the time. They were able to meet rom size requirements, completed the game in a reasonable dev cycle, and delivered what is still, 25+ years later, one of, if not the greatest 2d beat 'em up ever made, period, let alone on a 16-bit console. Give Sega/Ancient the same time and budget and access to tech that WM had, and their games would have been that much better.

Couple all that with this Paprium's near ludicrous compatibility issues, lackluster AI, shallow combat, and boss fights that border on inept combat design, and multitude of nonsensical design ideas like score obfuscation, save file locking, etc. The game has so many issues, but is still enjoyable.

I think that is my point with this, it doesn't even have to be a contest, because they can coexist and be fun, but if they had to be placed head to head, Paprium is not the better game. I can't believe I even have to argue this... Paprium is a fun beat 'em up, made by passionate people, that happens to be a powerhouse as far as tech and sound goes. But that is a result of time and a non-existent ceiling for space and cart components, released 25 years after the hardware's respective lifespan. We need to keep things in perspective.

Man, I'm surprised St1ka came to conclusion he arrived at. There's no goddamn timeline where Paprium is a better overall game, but it's a fun game, and it's great that it's on the Genesis, and I'm happy it's here.

---

I understand where you're coming from, but at the same time, at the end of the day, you can only compare the final product.

Different games will always have different budgets, tools and technology behind it, yet I think we can all agree we have a 16-bit game we'd rather play than many AAA games released for modern hardware. Does that mean the AAA was incompetently developed? Not really.

So while it's true Paprium had a ridiculously long development cycle and add-on chip, I mean... I'll take the MD version of Outrun over the MD Virtua Racing any day of the week and Virtua Racing had a an add-on chip as well

There are a lot of bosses that are really bad, because of a lack of a good AI and lack of a bigger spritesheet to add more moves to them.

Paprium has nothing to do against Bare Knuckle 3 gameplay wise, it needs 1 or 2 more years of polish.

More taking in consideration the level of polish that bare knuckle 3 has in terms of gameplay.

The problem with sor 2 is that its super slow. People tend to say that the punches has more impact than on bare knuckle 3, which you can say that is true. BuT the change of pace of Sor 3 was for the better, it made the gameplay feel a lot more dinamic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pepodmc

Paprium has nothing to do against Bare Knuckle 3 gameplay wise.

More taking in consideration the level of polish that bare knuckle 3 has in terms of gameplay.

---

To me, the Streets of Rage series' combat is better than Paprium, I'm not even debating that, the combat is better, the AI is better, you don't have the occasionally odd hit detection, etc.

But Paprium's exploration, multiple endings, secrets and even quality of life improvements like a save feature help it push over the edge for me. It's a case of the game being better than the sum of its parts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vludi

Irrelevant, I'm talking about the game's quality which is good despite being old, unlike Paprium.

---

Relevant, this is your opinion, not a fact. Personally I do not remember anyone being excited about it in the 80s.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vludi

Feel free to post your max difficulty runs without jump kick spams, would be fun to watch actually lol.

---

Lol. I think you still do not understand why I play video games. For gameplay only I do not care if I am winning or losing as long as I enjoy mechanics. Also those max difficulty runs are so boring, generic and schematic. I guess it is your way of enjoying games. You treat them as a work to do and enjoyment is an afterthought.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stika

To me, the Streets of Rage series' combat is better than Paprium, I'm not even debating that, the combat is better, the AI is better, you don't have the occasionally odd hit detection, etc.

But Paprium's exploration, multiple endings, secrets and even quality of life improvements like a save feature help it push over the edge for me. It's a case of the game being better than the sum of its parts.

---

You could say that Paprium's exploration, multiple endings, secrets add a lot of replayability.

But i think that a good gameplay makes the replayability even bigger. I played Bare knuckle 3 for the first time in 1997 (i was born in 1991) an never stopped playing it since that even with a pc cabale of play games of this consoles generation. i dont think that with paprium will be the same.

Im not saying that paprium doesnt have potential, but as it is now, its not enough.

PD: Check Sor 2x, its still in development and already its even better than Sorr remake gameplay wise, with a lot more options to choose to personalize your walkthrough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pepodmc

You could say that Paprium's exploration, multiple endings, secrets add a lot of replayability.

But i think that a good gameplay makes the replayability even bigger. I played Bare knuckle 3 for the first time in 1997 (i was born in 1991) an never stopped playing it since that even with a pc cabale of play games of this consoles generation. i dont think that with paprium will be the same.

Im not saying that paprium doesnt have potential, but as it is now, its not enough.

PD: Check Sor 2x, its still in development and already its even better than Sorr remake gameplay wise, with a lot more options to choose to personalize your walkthrough.

---

It really comes down to what people value in their gaming. Capcom's D&D games are my all-time favorite beat'em ups because of the replay value and all the RPG-lite mechanics.

I believe that if Paprium had launched back in the day (even if it only used the Sega Genesis sound chips instead of the FPGA) it would have been seen as one of the best of its generation.

Of course, it launched in 2020 and gaming standards have evolved massively since then. The last beat'em up I saw that people seem to remember after its first month was Scott Pilgrim vs. the World and... I just didn't care for that game.

For me, if Paprium were a regular beat'em up, that is to say, just a collection of linear levels like the ones found in Arcade mode, I'd have ranked on the same level as Golden Axe 2 and Comix Zone.

Once you add the Original mode, for me, it truly becomes something else entirely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stika

It really comes down to what people value in their gaming. Capcom's D&D games are my all-time favorite beat'em ups because of the replay value and all the RPG-lite mechanics.

I believe that if Paprium had launched back in the day (even if it only used the Sega Genesis sound chips instead of the FPGA) it would have been seen as one of the best of its generation.

Of course, it launched in 2020 and gaming standards have evolved massively since then. The last beat'em up I saw that people seem to remember after its first month was Scott Pilgrim vs. the World and... I just didn't care for that game.

For me, if Paprium were a regular beat'em up, that is to say, just a collection of linear levels like the ones found in Arcade mode, I'd have ranked on the same level as Golden Axe 2 and Comix Zone.

Once you add the Original mode, for me, it truly becomes something else entirely.

---

So, between lines you are saying that paprium is more quantity than quality? i mean, is the game has a lot of stages, endings and secrets, but an average gameplay (which is the most important thing in a videogame) ...