Bethesda (Makers of such hits as Oblivion and Fallout 3) Says That WRPG's Are More Realistic Than JR
- Thread starter Phoenix_XIII
- Start date
Recommended Videos
*hears roar in the distance*
*Ponders options for a moment*
Please excuse me from this debate, I have a to go and kill a 20ft tall mutant by shooting him in the head a lot until his limbs fly off and I get enough experience to level up and gain the ability to cause a small nuclear explosion whenever I get to low health. Of course if I were playing a JRPG, I'd be using a sword large than me, how silly!
*Grabs his hat which somehow makes him better at shooting and runs off*
If this is what Bethesda feels, then this is what Bethesda feels; it will not change the enjoyment factor of people who play JRPGs or WRPGs or both; realism is only as useful as what it adds to the game; if it adds nothing, it may as well be thrown off a cliff. I think WRPGs are more realistic in the sense they (usually) are more grounded in the laws of physics and don't (usually) have crazily convoluted plots involving impossibilities, but anyway, it doesn't matter; both genres have their crazy points and both are fun (personally I don't enjoy JRPGs, but I can't dispute the demographics; a lot of people out there do).
*Ponders options for a moment*
Please excuse me from this debate, I have a to go and kill a 20ft tall mutant by shooting him in the head a lot until his limbs fly off and I get enough experience to level up and gain the ability to cause a small nuclear explosion whenever I get to low health. Of course if I were playing a JRPG, I'd be using a sword large than me, how silly!
*Grabs his hat which somehow makes him better at shooting and runs off*
If this is what Bethesda feels, then this is what Bethesda feels; it will not change the enjoyment factor of people who play JRPGs or WRPGs or both; realism is only as useful as what it adds to the game; if it adds nothing, it may as well be thrown off a cliff. I think WRPGs are more realistic in the sense they (usually) are more grounded in the laws of physics and don't (usually) have crazily convoluted plots involving impossibilities, but anyway, it doesn't matter; both genres have their crazy points and both are fun (personally I don't enjoy JRPGs, but I can't dispute the demographics; a lot of people out there do).
Eh, they are equally unrealistic. And who the hell cares, anyway? Many things that make a RPG game great is that it is unrealistic. You really want to play a game where most of the experience is "Go to work, be bored for eight hours, go home, eat, cry yourself to sleep"? Because that's a very realistic game.
(And if you really want to play that sort of game, try Heavy Rain).
(And if you really want to play that sort of game, try Heavy Rain).
IT most likely is sarcasm or notDege84 said:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/WillingSuspensionOfDisbelief
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GameplayAndStorySegregation
Well, that is really sort of true. WRPGs tend to follow the rules of physics a bit better with their weapons, hairstyles and combat. Not to say WRPGs are very realistic either, but compared to JRPGS they really are.
Didn't look at the date did you? You're reallly late to the party; This debate has come and gone.
Are you seriously saying that androgyny, young heroes, anime-inspired art styles, and large weapons are more unrealistic than mythical monsters, magic, and demons? And then you're calling anyone who disagrees retarded? How do you not see something wrong with that?imahobbit4062 said:
A lot of people think they're clever when they generalize JRPGs by repeating stereotypes held almost exclusively by Cloud, but to say that anyone who calls you out on your ignorance is retarded just because? Come on man, grow some balls and think for yourself here.
Most of what you said aren't even "staples of JRPGs". Giant swords are not common in JRPGs, in fact I can only think of two. The gravity defying hair is an aesthetic art style that (if you really want realism and don't understand how art direction works) can be considered fashionably groomed in the game's culture. But mostly it's just reminiscent of Japanese anime, because it's a Japanese game.
But hey, at least you're right about teenagers commonly being heroes. And young people a couple of years ahead of their physical prime and living in a world whose culture probably considers adulthood to start whenever puberty hits is totally less realistic than those "typical" dragons.
More OT: They're both similarly unrealistic, but WRPGs seem realistic to us because they're grounded in more mainstream myths that westerners understand and accept. So to Bethesda's American/European audience, WRPGs are generally more realistic.
no i agree western RPGs are a lot more grounded in some kind of reality compared to jrpgs which are just really out there... but that dosent make jrpg bad (even though i dont really like them)
Wow. This didn't take long to spiral out of control. But no game is realistic. Nor will it ever be. Games are supposed to be a gateway to get away from reality. Right? (Im probably wrong).
You did use caps lock in your initial post, so I assumed that translated to frustration/anger.Phoenix_XIII said:
Sorry for the misunderstanding.
Yeh I agree with this. I wouldn't want a fantasy game to be realistic as that would essentially make it well not a fantasy game haha. But that being said I do like games that after defining their own rules no matter how bizarre, stick to those rules. As in they don't just change the game midway through making it very different by introducing a new type of spell or something that just ruins the rest of the spells for example.scully745 said:
i agree with bethsoft, sure both cultures rpgs are not based in our reality per say, but i think western rpgs tend to be more grounded in our reality than that of jrpgs, sure you will see a giant dragon in the new skyrim, but that dragon is one big omg it burns type of guy, in jrpgs you see prepubescent girls welding swords 3 times her size who can take on 20 grown men and win with out breaking a sweat.
Hobonicus said:
Now hold on, you messed up on the definition of realistic. Realism isn't "Looks just like the real world." Realism is 'theoretically could work'. For example, dragons could exist. I mean, they don't, but they're a perfectly plausible fantasy creature to have in a fantasy world. You can scientifically explain how they work. So dragons are a perfectly realistic thing to include - provided they operate realistically. Skyrim dragons are realistic, I would say. World of Warcraft dragons...not so much.
I've never played a JRPG that had any semblance of realism to it. That doesn't mean they're bad, it just means they're totally unrealistic. A few of them could have been realistic if they didn't go too far with it...but that all kinda goes out the window when excessive use of spirits and life-force and shit gets involved.
Also - magic. Magic can be realistic too. Realism applies to the world in which the characters reside. I do not care if this is not the dictionary definition, it's a freaking useful one. Magic in WRPGs tends to be semi-realistic - physical manifestation of focussed will or energy. In a world where magic is possible, I'd say that's a fairly realistic way of getting that across. Not brilliantly so, but serviceable.
I hope I've made sense here.
