All Jrpgs look the same? HA!

[asinann]

Other than Disgaea not being an RPG at all, the all LOOK different but they almost universally have stories with so many of the same elements that when I play them I can tell you what's going to happen in chapter 10 during chapter 2 and tell you who the end boss will be 20 minutes into the intro.

...IN WHAT WORLD IS DISGAEA NOT AN RPG? Everything has stats and levels out the ass in that game, and in most NIS games. SRPGs are still RPGs.

It's the same style as Final Fantasy TACTICS (that's the key word for you.) Tactics and strategy games are not RPGs of any kind even if they have some elements of the RPG in it. The story in the modern RPG while cliche is at least there, there is character development (in ways other than game mechanic) while games like Disgaea have stories, the stories are weak at best. The story in most tactics and strategy games is a backdrop for the real game, not the primary motivator.

...The genre was created by the Fire Emblem series. The genre is called "Strategy RPG."

That's why I find all of those games in the tactics/strategy section with Warcraft 3 and Command and Conquer right? And there's no RPG in the Fire Emblem series either. With no story driven character development, it's not an RPG. Occasionally in one of those games you are allowed 1 or 2 "choices" that effect nothing other than which ending you get to the game or what map you fight on for one battle.

 

[Twilight_guy]

1. People who say this are people who have never played the games
2. Only people who care about JRPG realize how many many of them there are besides final fantasy
3. They might be commenting that all JRPGs play the same, which is more true.
4. They are stupid and should be punched (not an argument but it needs to be said).

This is an outrage. I say we occupy a small nation over this.

Yes, let's go take over Cuba!

 

[Guitarmasterx7]

That's the first JRPG I've ever seen that looks like that. And the gameplay probably isn't much different, assuming that's an attack animation or something which is the main complaint of people who dislike JRPGs.

Every generalization has exceptions, but in a sea of JRPGs that look like the latter two, one exception doesn't stand to change the opinion of an entire genre much.

 

[Blood_Lined]

All Jrpgs look FEEL the same

There, fixed. You happy now? Lets move on with our lives, shall we.

At least they LOOK different. I like the play and feel of all JRPG's, because they are story/character focused RPG's, rather than "level-up" focused RPG's.

 

[asinann]

Other than Disgaea not being an RPG at all, the all LOOK different but they almost universally have stories with so many of the same elements that when I play them I can tell you what's going to happen in chapter 10 during chapter 2 and tell you who the end boss will be 20 minutes into the intro.

...IN WHAT WORLD IS DISGAEA NOT AN RPG? Everything has stats and levels out the ass in that game, and in most NIS games. SRPGs are still RPGs.

It's the same style as Final Fantasy TACTICS (that's the key word for you.) Tactics and strategy games are not RPGs of any kind even if they have some elements of the RPG in it. The story in the modern RPG while cliche is at least there, there is character development (in ways other than game mechanic) while games like Disgaea have stories, the stories are weak at best. The story in most tactics and strategy games is a backdrop for the real game, not the primary motivator.

...The genre was created by the Fire Emblem series. The genre is called "Strategy RPG."

That's why I find all of those games in the tactics/strategy section with Warcraft 3 and Command and Conquer right? And there's no RPG in the Fire Emblem series either. With no story driven character development, it's not an RPG. Occasionally in one of those games you are allowed 1 or 2 "choices" that effect nothing other than which ending you get to the game or what map you fight on for one battle.

Warcraft and Command and Conquer are RTS games. And and the definition of an video game RPG is a game in which "players control a character or party of characters who undertake quests, and whose capabilities advance using statistical mechanics."

FIRE EMBLEM IS ONE OF THE OLDEST CONSOLE RPGS OUT THERE AND INVENTOR OF THE CONSOLE SRPG GENRE. This is common knowledge.

You shouldn't claim misinformation as common knowledge just because you didn't have a Genesis or Turbo Graphix 16, those systems both had games from the genre years before the first Fire Emblem came out on the SNES. We also had a thread a few weeks ago where games like Final Fantasy Tactics were labeled as non-rpg games. Using the wikipedia definition for something doesn't help your case. Fire Emblem hasn't even hit 20 years yet, it's not "one of the oldest" or "the first" of anything.

 

[The DSM]

Yey, Disgaea and Tales of Vesperia, two of my faves.

And losts of people say there the same as the big RPG company is Square, almost all there games are the same. Teenagers with huge swords who angst all the time.

 

[Lullabye]

Yay, Disgaea and Tales of Vesperia, two of my faves.

And losts of people say there the same as the big RPG company is Square, almost all there games are the same. Teenagers with huge swords who angst all the time.

IT'S NOT EVEN TRUE THEN! You cannot look at The World Ends With You, Final Fantasy Tactics, and Chrono Trigger and say they are all the same.

I will give you a hint: Stop talking to trolls.

Why do people keep flaming over this? Its Like saying all western action games are the same.

 

[The Kangaroo]

The reason I don't like JRPGs is because they are not RPGs. Oh sure you can choose what you can use in combat but you are telling a linear story that you are in no way in control of. You don't control where you go, who you speak to and half the story is told through cut scenes.

 

[tyranuus]

Hmm, you should have thrown Valkyria Chronicles in there too (JRP/Strategy cross).

Reminds me I've got to try and get a copy of Tales of Vesperia before it dissapears from the UK like Symphonia did.

Too late.

Nope, managed to buy a new copy last night for £35 which was despatched today. Smaller site, apparently managed to get a very limited amount of stock in. You're right though, in general it's damned hard to find. If I hadnt found it I was going to go back into town today, as I saw a single, pre-owned copied in the 3/4 games shops in town yesterday.

Didn't buy it early on, on the off chance the expanded PS3 version came out over here, which has LOADs of extra content, however as its not even got a release date in the US right now...well, I'll grab it while I still can just in case.

Providing that turns up, thats ToS on GC and ToV on 360 I've got, both pretty rare games
I have the original Chronotrigger cartridge too haha

Tbh, what is said above, that you're effectively playing a controlled story, well I like books and a good story, so I guess, despite the cliches, thats why I enjoy JRPGs, they generally tell a story VERY differently to a WRPG, less freedom in the game, but more scope in the story usually. The japanese also seem to write interesting side characters slightly more often, although Bioware for example does that pretty well in thier games.

 

[asinann]

Other than Disgaea not being an RPG at all, the all LOOK different but they almost universally have stories with so many of the same elements that when I play them I can tell you what's going to happen in chapter 10 during chapter 2 and tell you who the end boss will be 20 minutes into the intro.

...IN WHAT WORLD IS DISGAEA NOT AN RPG? Everything has stats and levels out the ass in that game, and in most NIS games. SRPGs are still RPGs.

It's the same style as Final Fantasy TACTICS (that's the key word for you.) Tactics and strategy games are not RPGs of any kind even if they have some elements of the RPG in it. The story in the modern RPG while cliche is at least there, there is character development (in ways other than game mechanic) while games like Disgaea have stories, the stories are weak at best. The story in most tactics and strategy games is a backdrop for the real game, not the primary motivator.

...The genre was created by the Fire Emblem series. The genre is called "Strategy RPG."

That's why I find all of those games in the tactics/strategy section with Warcraft 3 and Command and Conquer right? And there's no RPG in the Fire Emblem series either. With no story driven character development, it's not an RPG. Occasionally in one of those games you are allowed 1 or 2 "choices" that effect nothing other than which ending you get to the game or what map you fight on for one battle.

Warcraft and Command and Conquer are RTS games. And and the definition of an video game RPG is a game in which "players control a character or party of characters who undertake quests, and whose capabilities advance using statistical mechanics."

FIRE EMBLEM IS ONE OF THE OLDEST CONSOLE RPGS OUT THERE AND INVENTOR OF THE CONSOLE SRPG GENRE. This is common knowledge.

You shouldn't claim misinformation as common knowledge just because you didn't have a Genesis or Turbo Graphix 16, those systems both had games from the genre years before the first Fire Emblem came out on the SNES. We also had a thread a few weeks ago where games like Final Fantasy Tactics were labeled as non-rpg games. Using the wikipedia definition for something doesn't help your case. Fire Emblem hasn't even hit 20 years yet, it's not "one of the oldest" or "the first" of anything.

...The first Fire Emblem came out for the NES (or rather, the Famicon).

Also this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tactical_role-playing_game

And I'm sure you've had a chance to play it since it didn't come out outside of Japan until 2009. The first one that came over here was released on the GBA in 2002. There aren't even fan translations of the first one. Common Knowledge means nearly everyone knows it, not that you can prove it true but the information you used to get it is obscure or would have been hard to find before the internet. The first time the genre was seen outside Japan was 1992 with Shining Force.
It took them until the 7th title to release one outside Japan.

But since this was about whether or not it's an actual RPG, it still isn't. The only ones that were close were the Shining Force games, and that's just because they were sequels to an actual RPG. Using your definition of RPG, Borderlands would be an RPG, and I'm pretty sure the general consensus was that it's an FPS. Just because there are stat upgrades and levels that are tossed in there to try and appeal to RPG players, does not make a game an RPG. The FPSRPG isn't an RPG, it FPS with some stats and leveling tossed in. The tactical rpg isn't an rpg, it's a tactical game with rpg elements tossed in.
(edit, forgot it was 2010)

 

[Shru1kan]

Those all look the same to me.

I must... agree?

Yahtzee hits it on the point. They all look like effeminate boys that stuck their head in a can of paint and call it a hairdo.

Plus, the gameplay mechanics are nearly identical from my experience.

Which is almost certainly NONEXISTENT.

Indeed, but that is borderline flamebait, no? It's their choice, and the reason why I cannot watch anime or play JRPGs is they all look copy/pasted with a generalized storyarc that has been beaten to death, and over-dramatization of feelings. I don't like turn based combat, this and the aforementioned reasons are my "turn-offs" for the genre.

But that just proves my own point. You don't know anything about say, the Tales series. Most of those are political dramas, and the combat has more in common with fighting games than turn based RPGs. All the Tales games from Symponia (Gamecube) on are random encounter free as well.

As for anime, it's a medium, not a genre. There's horror anime, there's action anime, there's arty titles, there's Baccano... [http://www.hulu.com/baccano]

I will admit, I was a little TOO general there.

Meh, take my opinion worth a grain of salt, I barely ever watch TV, only see about 5 movies a year... so shows aren't really interesting to me in the first place.

 

[asinann]

Other than Disgaea not being an RPG at all, the all LOOK different but they almost universally have stories with so many of the same elements that when I play them I can tell you what's going to happen in chapter 10 during chapter 2 and tell you who the end boss will be 20 minutes into the intro.

...IN WHAT WORLD IS DISGAEA NOT AN RPG? Everything has stats and levels out the ass in that game, and in most NIS games. SRPGs are still RPGs.

It's the same style as Final Fantasy TACTICS (that's the key word for you.) Tactics and strategy games are not RPGs of any kind even if they have some elements of the RPG in it. The story in the modern RPG while cliche is at least there, there is character development (in ways other than game mechanic) while games like Disgaea have stories, the stories are weak at best. The story in most tactics and strategy games is a backdrop for the real game, not the primary motivator.

...The genre was created by the Fire Emblem series. The genre is called "Strategy RPG."

That's why I find all of those games in the tactics/strategy section with Warcraft 3 and Command and Conquer right? And there's no RPG in the Fire Emblem series either. With no story driven character development, it's not an RPG. Occasionally in one of those games you are allowed 1 or 2 "choices" that effect nothing other than which ending you get to the game or what map you fight on for one battle.

Warcraft and Command and Conquer are RTS games. And and the definition of an video game RPG is a game in which "players control a character or party of characters who undertake quests, and whose capabilities advance using statistical mechanics."

FIRE EMBLEM IS ONE OF THE OLDEST CONSOLE RPGS OUT THERE AND INVENTOR OF THE CONSOLE SRPG GENRE. This is common knowledge.

You shouldn't claim misinformation as common knowledge just because you didn't have a Genesis or Turbo Graphix 16, those systems both had games from the genre years before the first Fire Emblem came out on the SNES. We also had a thread a few weeks ago where games like Final Fantasy Tactics were labeled as non-rpg games. Using the wikipedia definition for something doesn't help your case. Fire Emblem hasn't even hit 20 years yet, it's not "one of the oldest" or "the first" of anything.

...The first Fire Emblem came out for the NES (or rather, the Famicon).

Also this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tactical_role-playing_game

And I'm sure you've had a chance to play it since it didn't come out outside of Japan until 2009. The first one that came over here was released on the GBA in 2002. There aren't even fan translations of the first one. Common Knowledge means nearly everyone knows it, not that you can prove it true but the information you used to get it is obscure or would have been hard to find before the internet. The first time the genre was seen outside Japan was 1992 with Shining Force.
It took them until the 7th title to release one outside Japan.

But since this was about whether or not it's an actual RPG, it still isn't. The only ones that were close were the Shining Force games, and that's just because they were sequels to an actual RPG. Using your definition of RPG, Borderlands would be an RPG, and I'm pretty sure the general consensus was that it's an FPS. Just because there are stat upgrades and levels that are tossed in there to try and appeal to RPG players, does not make a game an RPG. The FPSRPG isn't an RPG, it FPS with some stats and leveling tossed in. The tactical rpg isn't an rpg, it's a tactical game with rpg elements tossed in.
(edit, forgot it was 2010)

It doesn't matter if it Shining Force came out over here first, FE1 came out 2 years before it did.

And you can play the first one without knowing English you know. It just takes trial and error.

And yes, these are all role playing games. Tactical RPGs, but that's just a subgenre. There's a difference between something that's absolutely engrossed in stats like Fire Emblem or Fallout and something where the stats are just thrown in arbitrarily like the new Wolfenstein,

Except that Fire Emblem isn't engrossed in stats, it's a very pretty version of Paper Rock Scissors (Axe/Sword/Lance.) Unless you are 10 or more levels higher than the person with your weakness, the odds are that they will kill you in one round, the majority of the time without taking damage. All tactics games are stat based to that degree, but at least they have a RNG in them.

And as for your "trial and error" approach, I doubt very much you played that game before it's rerelease on the DS.

 

[WillSimplyBe]

Other than Disgaea not being an RPG at all, the all LOOK different but they almost universally have stories with so many of the same elements that when I play them I can tell you what's going to happen in chapter 10 during chapter 2 and tell you who the end boss will be 20 minutes into the intro.

...IN WHAT WORLD IS DISGAEA NOT AN RPG? Everything has stats and levels out the ass in that game, and in most NIS games. SRPGs are still RPGs.

It's the same style as Final Fantasy TACTICS (that's the key word for you.) Tactics and strategy games are not RPGs of any kind even if they have some elements of the RPG in it. The story in the modern RPG while cliche is at least there, there is character development (in ways other than game mechanic) while games like Disgaea have stories, the stories are weak at best. The story in most tactics and strategy games is a backdrop for the real game, not the primary motivator.

...The genre was created by the Fire Emblem series. The genre is called "Strategy RPG."

That's why I find all of those games in the tactics/strategy section with Warcraft 3 and Command and Conquer right? And there's no RPG in the Fire Emblem series either. With no story driven character development, it's not an RPG. Occasionally in one of those games you are allowed 1 or 2 "choices" that effect nothing other than which ending you get to the game or what map you fight on for one battle.

Warcraft and Command and Conquer are RTS games. And and the definition of an video game RPG is a game in which "players control a character or party of characters who undertake quests, and whose capabilities advance using statistical mechanics."

FIRE EMBLEM IS ONE OF THE OLDEST CONSOLE RPGS OUT THERE AND INVENTOR OF THE CONSOLE SRPG GENRE. This is common knowledge.

You shouldn't claim misinformation as common knowledge just because you didn't have a Genesis or Turbo Graphix 16, those systems both had games from the genre years before the first Fire Emblem came out on the SNES. We also had a thread a few weeks ago where games like Final Fantasy Tactics were labeled as non-rpg games. Using the wikipedia definition for something doesn't help your case. Fire Emblem hasn't even hit 20 years yet, it's not "one of the oldest" or "the first" of anything.

...The first Fire Emblem came out for the NES (or rather, the Famicon).

Also this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tactical_role-playing_game

And I'm sure you've had a chance to play it since it didn't come out outside of Japan until 2009. The first one that came over here was released on the GBA in 2002. There aren't even fan translations of the first one. Common Knowledge means nearly everyone knows it, not that you can prove it true but the information you used to get it is obscure or would have been hard to find before the internet. The first time the genre was seen outside Japan was 1992 with Shining Force.
It took them until the 7th title to release one outside Japan.

But since this was about whether or not it's an actual RPG, it still isn't. The only ones that were close were the Shining Force games, and that's just because they were sequels to an actual RPG. Using your definition of RPG, Borderlands would be an RPG, and I'm pretty sure the general consensus was that it's an FPS. Just because there are stat upgrades and levels that are tossed in there to try and appeal to RPG players, does not make a game an RPG. The FPSRPG isn't an RPG, it FPS with some stats and leveling tossed in. The tactical rpg isn't an rpg, it's a tactical game with rpg elements tossed in.
(edit, forgot it was 2010)

It doesn't matter if it Shining Force came out over here first, FE1 came out 2 years before it did.

And you can play the first one without knowing English you know. It just takes trial and error.

And yes, these are all role playing games. Tactical RPGs, but that's just a subgenre. There's a difference between something that's absolutely engrossed in stats like Fire Emblem or Fallout and something where the stats are just thrown in arbitrarily like the new Wolfenstein,

Except that Fire Emblem isn't engrossed in stats, it's a very pretty version of Paper Rock Scissors (Axe/Sword/Lance.) Unless you are 10 or more levels higher than the person with your weakness, the odds are that they will kill you in one round, the majority of the time without taking damage. All tactics games are stat based to that degree, but at least they have a RNG in them.

And as for your "trial and error" approach, I doubt very much you played that game before it's rerelease on the DS.

You're arguing nomenclature. The fact is that games like the Fire Emblem series, Final Fantasy Tactics, or the Disgaea games are considered TURN BASED STRATEGY ROLE PLAYING GAMES.

 

[Doctor Glocktor]

Rainbow hair? Check.

Spikey hair? Check.

Huge-ass eyes? Check.

So yeah, they do.