BioWare Co-Founder Accuses JRPGs of Stagnation

[thebobmaster_v1legacy]

Finally someone says something about the "but thou must" senario.

But thou still must in BW games if thou wants to do missions, privy.

Wait what?

The question is "do you want to do the mission?" and if you want to, you say yes.
Most of the time there's another option, but sadly, I don't think enough of them were "punch dude in the face".

But there was that interview in Mass Effect, where there was the choice "punch that ***** out".

Shepard: I've had enough of your snide accusations! *Shepard PAUNCH!*

 

[Enigmers]

What few JRPGs I have I enjoy - the only thing that I don't like is overly long unskippable cutscenes before overly long difficult boss fights.

There are good ones and bad ones, whether or not you enjoy a JRPG depends on how lame it can get before you tell it to fuck right off. Tales of Vesperia, for example, is pretty fun and doesn't follow every stereotype in the book (though it obviously doesn't ignore them all.) Eternal Sonata, however, seems so unbearably cheesy that I'd end up with a collection of mice clogging my XBox's air vents if I ever decided to play it.

Lastly, the Japanese good look at western RPGs and say "Oh look at that, I can play the same game over again, but choose the "bad" choice every time and see a different ending! Maybe they could have added some actual gameplay instead of forcing you to play the game twice. Oh well."
With JRPGs, the main story tends to be linear, but there are lots of side-areas and whatnot, so that's where the replay value is.

Saying "every JRPG is the same with with different window covers" is like saying "every RTS is the same but with different unit skins" or "Every Western RPG is the same except for the degree to which you can expand your character's tits."

 

[Helba1984]

This article is amusing. I was introduced to RPGs with JRPGs; personally, that's my idea of an RPG. Things like Fallout 3 strike me more as an FPS than RPG.

Anyway, back on subject:
I personally like the linearity of JRPGs. They have a set story and strike me as a fun, interactive novel moreso than something that doesn't have a strong storyline.

Agreed. WRPGs seem to be a shooter with a sword and fantasy-based character and environment skins.

To me that's not an RPG, it's an Action-RPG, at BEST.

And JRPGs where you have to do what the designer commanded would happen is very "Role Playing"... oh wait, no, its not, its watching a bloody movie or novel.

Nope. You're caught in the Half-Life illusion.

Even if they let you wander around the land like a fucktard, WRPGs still have a developer-set narrative.

The only difference is the illusion that what you do changes anything in the long term.

Your point = epic fail.

 

[HyenaThePirate]

I think the main problem with the decline of JRPG's in the west is that there ARENT ANY..

I mean seriously, you can count on one hand the JRPG's on the ps3.. the XBOX 360 has more and I thought I'd never live to see that day.. Playstation was always my "RPG" console..
and in a way I guess it still is.. there are still a few PS2 titles kicking about but most of those are sequels that are for a large part rehashing some old tired properties..

Seriously, Persona 5 for the PS3 needs to drop SOON.
And honestly, I'm about done with the Final Fantasy series.. in my opinion bioware is right on that, the Final Fantasy series has just stagnated to me... sure they come up with a new combat system but after a while it just manages to be a new combat system wrapped up in an old gaming system. The games have become more like interactive MOVIES, except games like Heavy Rain are doing THAT different and in many ways far better. I could care less about how awesome the gaming visuals are, or the cut scenes, i play JRPGS for the story and the depth when it has them.. honestly, without Atlus I think the JRPG market in the west would be on life support.

Maybe there are tons of JRPGS that just arent porting over. I wouldnt really consider Demon's Souls a JRPG since it's style is such a homage to western rpg's if you didnt tell me it was made by the Japanese, I'd have been inclined to think it was some European developer who made it.

Even the grandaddies of the genre are sort of running things like it's still 1994.. Look at the JRPG's coming off on the Xbox.. Lost Oddysey and Infinite Undiscovery were pretty much classic JRPG's in pretty packaging.

Time to get someone working on that formula or watch the genre die in the West because I'll be damned if i Play a JRPG with PSone SPRITES on a $300 modern console when there are far better alternatives.

 

[theultimateend]

The best JRPG's are and have always been, absolutely fantastic games. Better than most of anything being released in the west.

The key problem as I see it, is that they call them "RPG". They aren't role playing games, they're interactive storylines where the interaction element is primarily just the battle systems. They really need their own label, since there is no real role playing (as exampled in games such as the BioWares own titles) that can be considered proper to the genre in the modern times. Games like Oblivion and MassEffect give choices for characters which, while harshly limited, at least emerge into the area of playing ones own character choices.

Final Fantasy? Chrono Crisis? Single story line, selected character actions, the player merely needs to guide them around. Is this always bad? Hell no, look at The World Ends With You! Devil Survivor [actually, special note here, DS is probably the most RPG of all JRPGs] get major props for being smashing games despite this.

Or perhaps they are taking the term RPG literally.

You are playing a role in a game.

Did it say you'd be choosing which role? No. They give you a role and you play that role.

That's how I always understood it in the Japanese versions. Makes sense since we tend to make terms ambiguous in the west.

A lot of RPG gamers have become accustomed to Bioware's tropes is really all it is... their products are just more fresh at the moment.

I do agree that most every JRPG is quite linear and cliche anymore. Seems like they peaked right around the PlayStation/Saturn/N64 days. That's not to say if what you're looking for is what they deliver, that you can't find enjoyment in them. By all means, if you love every JRPG you come in contact with, don't let this article bother you.

Personally, I like being able to make every decision in a game myself with a character I generate myself rather than being led along a linear path with a prefabricated androgynous teenager with malformed hair and a giant sword.

I really did look at what Bioware does as the natural evolution of video game RPGs. Having very linear paths and preset characters, to me, always seemed like a result of the technology of the day (8-bit & 16-bit eras). Some of those older games are perceived as classics today but you can generally find the same Copy/Paste routine in every one churned out now. If anything, I find the older JRPGs better simply for their charm and nostalgia.

I don't really see the open ended nature of WRPGs though. They give you 20 options during a discussion with an NPC that all end up leading you to the same conclusion.

The only time you get any real choice is when it is an optional side mission and JRPGs have that same trait.

If you were supposed to close the oblivion gates you will close the oblivion gates. If you don't close them you'll just be grinding until you do. If you don't find your father once you escape the vault you'll just be grinding till you do.

I love both genres. But they both are just doing the same thing with a slightly different reskin.

 

[JonahHex]

Agreed. WRPGs seem to be a shooter with a sword and fantasy-based character and environment skins.

To me that's not an RPG, it's an Action-RPG, at BEST.

I find it funny that many people here seem to be deeply familiar with how Japanese RPGs have been from the beginning, but have no clue about what Western RPGs were like in the post-BioWare period. I guess that's because WRPGs were on PCs before then.

Lastly, the Japanese good look at western RPGs and say "Oh look at that, I can play the same game over again, but choose the "bad" choice every time and see a different ending! Maybe they could have added some actual gameplay instead of forcing you to play the game twice. Oh well."
With JRPGs, the main story tends to be linear, but there are lots of side-areas and whatnot, so that's where the replay value is.

Yeah, I won't disagree that Japanese gamers at large don't seem to like modern Western RPGs much, but the fact remains that they do seem to like old ones.

Some people in this thread have said that if it wasn't for Final Fantasy and the like, there wouldn't be any BioWare. This is probably true. But if it wasn't for Wizardry, Might and Magic and Ultima, there wouldn't have been any Final Fantasy.

Every genre has it's tics, and this little spat over ones in subgenres of RPGs is kind of silly. Both schools should be taking the best from both and synthesizing them into something new and great.

 

[HyenaThePirate]

Or perhaps they are taking the term RPG literally.

You are playing a role in a game.

Did it say you'd be choosing which role? No. They give you a role and you play that role.

That's how I always understood it in the Japanese versions. Makes sense since we tend to make terms ambiguous in the west.

Under that definition tho, EVERY game technically would be an RPG, as you are just "playing a role".

 

[theultimateend]

Or perhaps they are taking the term RPG literally.

You are playing a role in a game.

Did it say you'd be choosing which role? No. They give you a role and you play that role.

That's how I always understood it in the Japanese versions. Makes sense since we tend to make terms ambiguous in the west.

Under that definition tho, EVERY game technically would be an RPG, as you are just "playing a role".

Welcome to the underlying problem of labeling.

It is only black and white on the extreme ends. In the middle things get muddled.

 

[JonahHex]

Even if they let you wander around the land like a fucktard, WRPGs still have a developer-set narrative.

The only difference is the illusion that what you do changes anything in the long term.

Your point = epic fail.

Despite the snottiness of this post, the guy's got a point.

We shouldn't pretend that WRPGs aren't linear. They are. However, this isn't anything bad - all fiction of any kind has a beginning, middle and end. Why are people slighting Japanese RPGs for following the laws of fiction?

The difference is that usually, the linearity of WRPGs is YOUR CHOICE. You can drop and pick-up the main plot at your convenience. Are there any JRPGs that let you wander about doing sub-quests, that allow you to deviate from the overarching quest for awhile? Most of the JRPGs I've enjoyed recently are ones like Etrian Odyssey, I haven't played one with heavy plot for a long time.

 

[Helba1984]

Even if they let you wander around the land like a fucktard, WRPGs still have a developer-set narrative.

The only difference is the illusion that what you do changes anything in the long term.

Your point = epic fail.

Despite the snottiness of this post, the guy's got a point.

We shouldn't pretend that WRPGs aren't linear. They are. However, this isn't anything bad - all fiction of any kind has a beginning, middle and end. Why are people slighting Japanese RPGs for following the laws of fiction?

The difference is that usually, the linearity of WRPGs is YOUR CHOICE. You can drop and pick-up the main plot at your convenience. Are there any JRPGs that let you wander about doing sub-quests, that allow you to deviate from the overarching quest for awhile? Most of the JRPGs I've enjoyed recently are ones like Etrian Odyssey, I haven't played one with heavy plot for a long time.

Thank you for being level-headed about this. There are actually a lot of WRPGs I like, such as Morrowind (Oblivion was OK but there was a ton less content so I did not like it as much) so please don't misinterpret me as a JRPG-only guy. It's the WRPG-only people hating on JRPGs for following simple narrative rules that even WRPGs books and hell even FPS follows that boils my blood.

Prime example of "Western" gamer attitude toward any JRPG before even playing it:

http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2006/9/6/

And the entire western dev and review world seems to do the same thing. SO hypocritical when I can sneeze and run into one of their genre tropes. But you don't see me complaining about them do you? I don't post hate threads or down any WRPG before playing it - I enjoy everything from Diablo to Sacred to Morrowind and Kotor, but I also have a large collection of japanese games too. I like them both for different reasons, and the idea that one or the other is inferior is hypocrisy at its best.

 

[HyenaThePirate]

Even if they let you wander around the land like a fucktard, WRPGs still have a developer-set narrative.

The only difference is the illusion that what you do changes anything in the long term.

Your point = epic fail.

Despite the snottiness of this post, the guy's got a point.

We shouldn't pretend that WRPGs aren't linear. They are. However, this isn't anything bad - all fiction of any kind has a beginning, middle and end. Why are people slighting Japanese RPGs for following the laws of fiction?

The difference is that usually, the linearity of WRPGs is YOUR CHOICE. You can drop and pick-up the main plot at your convenience. Are there any JRPGs that let you wander about doing sub-quests, that allow you to deviate from the overarching quest for awhile? Most of the JRPGs I've enjoyed recently are ones like Etrian Odyssey, I haven't played one with heavy plot for a long time.

Probably because there is a HUGE gulf of difference between "linear" and "out and out hand-holding"...

I look at JRPG's as a good, solid story novel from start to finish. Beginning, middle, end, story done straight and easy.

Western RPG's tend to be more like a choose your own adventure...

The biggest difference is, in most Wrpg's you can lose hours, days, months and even years and NEVER actually conclude that story until you are ready because there is the illusion of a Whole wide world out there..
In JRPG's you typically don't have that... what you get is dungeon exploration mixed with some grinding while the story continues often whether you want it to or not.
In WRPG's most of the time you MAKE your own fun, such as in Oblivion, where in JRPG's you go along for the ride..

To sum it up..

Wrpg's are like an amusement park.
Jrpg's are like Mr. Toad's Wild Ride.

 

[Bobbovski]

Even if they let you wander around the land like a fucktard, WRPGs still have a developer-set narrative.

The only difference is the illusion that what you do changes anything in the long term.

Your point = epic fail.

Despite the snottiness of this post, the guy's got a point.

We shouldn't pretend that WRPGs aren't linear. They are. However, this isn't anything bad - all fiction of any kind has a beginning, middle and end. Why are people slighting Japanese RPGs for following the laws of fiction?

The difference is that usually, the linearity of WRPGs is YOUR CHOICE. You can drop and pick-up the main plot at your convenience. Are there any JRPGs that let you wander about doing sub-quests, that allow you to deviate from the overarching quest for awhile? Most of the JRPGs I've enjoyed recently are ones like Etrian Odyssey, I haven't played one with heavy plot for a long time.

I won't comment on JRPGs since I've never really played one. But many(?) or at least several WRPGs let you decide allot of the storyline and what happens in the game... Also multiple possible endings aren't that uncommon. Who do you befriend? Who do you help or kill? Are you good or evil? In western RPGs details and sections in the game might change depending on how you answer those questions with your character. In Mass effect there are four(?) very different endings depending on certain choices you make. In Fallout 1 & 2 your actions have a ton of different consequences that you'll find out about in the end of the game and there's probably several other examples that I can't think of right now.

 

[Helba1984]

Even if they let you wander around the land like a fucktard, WRPGs still have a developer-set narrative.

The only difference is the illusion that what you do changes anything in the long term.

Your point = epic fail.

Despite the snottiness of this post, the guy's got a point.

We shouldn't pretend that WRPGs aren't linear. They are. However, this isn't anything bad - all fiction of any kind has a beginning, middle and end. Why are people slighting Japanese RPGs for following the laws of fiction?

The difference is that usually, the linearity of WRPGs is YOUR CHOICE. You can drop and pick-up the main plot at your convenience. Are there any JRPGs that let you wander about doing sub-quests, that allow you to deviate from the overarching quest for awhile? Most of the JRPGs I've enjoyed recently are ones like Etrian Odyssey, I haven't played one with heavy plot for a long time.

I won't comment on JRPGs since I've never really played one. But many(?) or at least several WRPGs let you decide allot of the storyline and what happens in the game... Also multiple possible endings aren't that uncommon. Who do you befriend? Who do you help or kill? Are you good or evil? In western RPGs details and sections in the game might change depending on how you answer those questions with your character. In Mass effect there are four(?) very different endings depending on certain choices you make. In Fallout 1 & 2 your actions have a ton of different consequences that you'll find out about in the end of the game and there's probably several other examples that I can't think of right now.

Actually FFX-2 had choices and differing story outcomes, and the entire western gaming world seemed to piss on it nonstop. It was also more of an open-world game too.

 

[Helba1984]

Even if they let you wander around the land like a fucktard, WRPGs still have a developer-set narrative.

The only difference is the illusion that what you do changes anything in the long term.

Your point = epic fail.

Despite the snottiness of this post, the guy's got a point.

We shouldn't pretend that WRPGs aren't linear. They are. However, this isn't anything bad - all fiction of any kind has a beginning, middle and end. Why are people slighting Japanese RPGs for following the laws of fiction?

The difference is that usually, the linearity of WRPGs is YOUR CHOICE. You can drop and pick-up the main plot at your convenience. Are there any JRPGs that let you wander about doing sub-quests, that allow you to deviate from the overarching quest for awhile? Most of the JRPGs I've enjoyed recently are ones like Etrian Odyssey, I haven't played one with heavy plot for a long time.

Probably because there is a HUGE gulf of difference between "linear" and "out and out hand-holding"...

I look at JRPG's as a good, solid story novel from start to finish. Beginning, middle, end, story done straight and easy.

Western RPG's tend to be more like a choose your own adventure...

The biggest difference is, in most Wrpg's you can lose hours, days, months and even years and NEVER actually conclude that story until you are ready because there is the illusion of a Whole wide world out there..
In JRPG's you typically don't have that... what you get is dungeon exploration mixed with some grinding while the story continues often whether you want it to or not.
In WRPG's most of the time you MAKE your own fun, such as in Oblivion, where in JRPG's you go along for the ride..

To sum it up..

Wrpg's are like an amusement park.
Jrpg's are like Mr. Toad's Wild Ride.

They are more like The Truman Show than an amusement park.

 

[boholikeu]

Sacred 2 (Dungeon Crawl, grind, enemies level up with you). BTW i do have a level 101 Sera. I like WRPG as well, but it's hypocritical to point the finger at those made in the East.

Borderlands (First Person, Dungeon Crawl (albeit outdoor), Grind). I hate this boring, repetitive game.

Those are two fairly recent examples.

I'll give you Sacred 2, but Borderlands? I was under the impression that it was basically a FPS shooter with RPG elements, a la Bioshock.

Skimmed through this thread but didn´t really find this mentioned:
I think with "stagnation" he didn´t mean technic, presentation, the type of combat, but rather how the actual storytelling is done. There is a huge gap between the actual gameplay including it´s game mechanic and the storytelling. Why, for example, have i blasted every enemy i can find (including bosses) to oblivion with my best spells in record time, when in the next cutscene the same character gets beaten up by the schoolyard bully and runs away crying?
That´s where they haven´t really involved.

This. This is what the quote is actually referring to, and yet people keep arguing about plot cliches and linearity.

It was panned because western reviewers are biased against anything that's turn based and not open world.

It's one of the best turn based JRPG I've ever played. It's a cooperative effort by all the main Japanese RPG developers actually.

It also got some pretty lackluster reviews from the Japanese media, so unless they have an anti-JRPG bias also your argument doesn't stand =)

Still I'm willing to try the game out if you can give me some specifics about why the game was so great.

This article is amusing. I was introduced to RPGs with JRPGs; personally, that's my idea of an RPG. Things like Fallout 3 strike me more as an FPS than RPG.

Anyway, back on subject:
I personally like the linearity of JRPGs. They have a set story and strike me as a fun, interactive novel moreso than something that doesn't have a strong storyline.

Agreed. WRPGs seem to be a shooter with a sword and fantasy-based character and environment skins.

To me that's not an RPG, it's an Action-RPG, at BEST.

And JRPGs where you have to do what the designer commanded would happen is very "Role Playing"... oh wait, no, its not, its watching a bloody movie or novel.

Nope. You're caught in the Half-Life illusion.

Even if they let you wander around the land like a fucktard, WRPGs still have a developer-set narrative.

The only difference is the illusion that what you do changes anything in the long term.

Your point = epic fail.

I've heard this argument before, but I think it actually supports the WRPG>JRPG position more than it does yours. I mean, if both WRPGs and JRPGs are essentially linear yet WRPGs use techniques to "trick" you into thinking you have choice, doesn't that make WRPGs better by design since they are able to draw you in to the illusion of the game world better?

It's kind of like what the quote in the article was referring to in the dialogue example. In badly framed RPGs the NPC will give you a role-playing choice, but you won't be able to continue without choosing the "right" answer (thus defeating the point of having a choice at all by breaking your suspension of disbelief). A better RPG will acknowledge your choice but send you on the quest anyway (for example, the NPC tells you to man up and stop being such a coward/running away isn't an option), or they would do away with the dialogue choice entirely because a "no" answer would conflict with their characterization of the protagonist.

I think the main problem with the decline of JRPG's in the west is that there ARENT ANY..

Actually, you should be happy they don't bring over more. Most of the ones that don't get localized are really bottom of the barrel.

 

[Helba1984]

Sacred 2 (Dungeon Crawl, grind, enemies level up with you). BTW i do have a level 101 Sera. I like WRPG as well, but it's hypocritical to point the finger at those made in the East.

Borderlands (First Person, Dungeon Crawl (albeit outdoor), Grind). I hate this boring, repetitive game.

Those are two fairly recent examples.

I'll give you Sacred 2, but Borderlands? I was under the impression that it was basically a FPS shooter with RPG elements, a la Bioshock.

Skimmed through this thread but didn´t really find this mentioned:
I think with "stagnation" he didn´t mean technic, presentation, the type of combat, but rather how the actual storytelling is done. There is a huge gap between the actual gameplay including it´s game mechanic and the storytelling. Why, for example, have i blasted every enemy i can find (including bosses) to oblivion with my best spells in record time, when in the next cutscene the same character gets beaten up by the schoolyard bully and runs away crying?
That´s where they haven´t really involved.

This. This is what the quote is actually referring to, and yet people keep arguing about plot cliches and linearity.

It was panned because western reviewers are biased against anything that's turn based and not open world.

It's one of the best turn based JRPG I've ever played. It's a cooperative effort by all the main Japanese RPG developers actually.

It also got some pretty lackluster reviews from the Japanese media, so unless they have an anti-JRPG bias also your argument doesn't stand =)

Still I'm willing to try the game out if you can give me some specifics about why the game was so great.

This article is amusing. I was introduced to RPGs with JRPGs; personally, that's my idea of an RPG. Things like Fallout 3 strike me more as an FPS than RPG.

Anyway, back on subject:
I personally like the linearity of JRPGs. They have a set story and strike me as a fun, interactive novel moreso than something that doesn't have a strong storyline.

Agreed. WRPGs seem to be a shooter with a sword and fantasy-based character and environment skins.

To me that's not an RPG, it's an Action-RPG, at BEST.

And JRPGs where you have to do what the designer commanded would happen is very "Role Playing"... oh wait, no, its not, its watching a bloody movie or novel.

Nope. You're caught in the Half-Life illusion.

Even if they let you wander around the land like a fucktard, WRPGs still have a developer-set narrative.

The only difference is the illusion that what you do changes anything in the long term.

Your point = epic fail.

I've heard this argument before, but I think it actually supports the WRPG>JRPG position more than it does yours. I mean, if both WRPGs and JRPGs are essentially linear yet WRPGs use techniques to "trick" you into thinking you have choice, doesn't that make WRPGs better by design since they are able to draw you in to the illusion of the game world better?

It's kind of like what the quote in the article was referring to in the dialogue example. In badly framed RPGs the NPC will give you a role-playing choice, but you won't be able to continue without choosing the "right" answer (thus defeating the point of having a choice at all by breaking your suspension of disbelief). A better RPG will acknowledge your choice but send you on the quest anyway (for example, the NPC tells you to man up and stop being such a coward/running away isn't an option), or they would do away with the dialogue choice entirely because a "no" answer would conflict with their characterization of the protagonist.

I really don't care for being presented the illusion of interactivity. I play an RPG for the storyline, so being able to make arbitrary "Role-Playing" choices that in reality affect little to nothing doesn't appeal to me and doesn't make me more likely to play a WRPG over a JRPG. And frankly JRPG stories I like better; I like having a coherent solid narrative instead of one so severely diluted as to be a shadow of itself (and sometimes downright confusing) because it has to be that way to make your "choices" seem real.

Edit:

Cross Edge's strength is its battle system. If you're a stat/combo freak like me who loves special abilities and Morrigan in little clothing, you must get this game

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKoDuTfimtc

 

[Doug]

Spoiler: Space saver

Sacred 2 (Dungeon Crawl, grind, enemies level up with you). BTW i do have a level 101 Sera. I like WRPG as well, but it's hypocritical to point the finger at those made in the East.

Borderlands (First Person, Dungeon Crawl (albeit outdoor), Grind). I hate this boring, repetitive game.

Those are two fairly recent examples.

I'll give you Sacred 2, but Borderlands? I was under the impression that it was basically a FPS shooter with RPG elements, a la Bioshock.

Skimmed through this thread but didn´t really find this mentioned:
I think with "stagnation" he didn´t mean technic, presentation, the type of combat, but rather how the actual storytelling is done. There is a huge gap between the actual gameplay including it´s game mechanic and the storytelling. Why, for example, have i blasted every enemy i can find (including bosses) to oblivion with my best spells in record time, when in the next cutscene the same character gets beaten up by the schoolyard bully and runs away crying?
That´s where they haven´t really involved.

This. This is what the quote is actually referring to, and yet people keep arguing about plot cliches and linearity.

It was panned because western reviewers are biased against anything that's turn based and not open world.

It's one of the best turn based JRPG I've ever played. It's a cooperative effort by all the main Japanese RPG developers actually.

It also got some pretty lackluster reviews from the Japanese media, so unless they have an anti-JRPG bias also your argument doesn't stand =)

Still I'm willing to try the game out if you can give me some specifics about why the game was so great.

This article is amusing. I was introduced to RPGs with JRPGs; personally, that's my idea of an RPG. Things like Fallout 3 strike me more as an FPS than RPG.

Anyway, back on subject:
I personally like the linearity of JRPGs. They have a set story and strike me as a fun, interactive novel moreso than something that doesn't have a strong storyline.

Agreed. WRPGs seem to be a shooter with a sword and fantasy-based character and environment skins.

To me that's not an RPG, it's an Action-RPG, at BEST.

And JRPGs where you have to do what the designer commanded would happen is very "Role Playing"... oh wait, no, its not, its watching a bloody movie or novel.

Nope. You're caught in the Half-Life illusion.

Even if they let you wander around the land like a fucktard, WRPGs still have a developer-set narrative.

The only difference is the illusion that what you do changes anything in the long term.

Your point = epic fail.

I've heard this argument before, but I think it actually supports the WRPG>JRPG position more than it does yours. I mean, if both WRPGs and JRPGs are essentially linear yet WRPGs use techniques to "trick" you into thinking you have choice, doesn't that make WRPGs better by design since they are able to draw you in to the illusion of the game world better?

It's kind of like what the quote in the article was referring to in the dialogue example. In badly framed RPGs the NPC will give you a role-playing choice, but you won't be able to continue without choosing the "right" answer (thus defeating the point of having a choice at all by breaking your suspension of disbelief). A better RPG will acknowledge your choice but send you on the quest anyway (for example, the NPC tells you to man up and stop being such a coward/running away isn't an option), or they would do away with the dialogue choice entirely because a "no" answer would conflict with their characterization of the protagonist.

I think the main problem with the decline of JRPG's in the west is that there ARENT ANY..

Actually, you should be happy they don't bring over more. Most of the ones that don't get localized are really bottom of the barrel.

This - good post. I have given JRPGs a few tries, but frankly, they always disappoint me and I end up feeling like I wasted my cash for no good reason (even if I get them from a bargin bin). I like my games to be, you know, GAMEs, not a novel without even the presence of choice (even if there is no actual choice). If I wanted a novel in visual form, I'd watch a movie...or read a novel and use my imagination. At least that is meant to be a story telling medium that offers no illustion of interactivity or control.

Also nice not to have 'Helba1984' wishing me dead (literally) again.

 

[boholikeu]

I really don't care for being presented the illusion of interactivity. I play an RPG for the storyline, so being able to make arbitrary "Role-Playing" choices that in reality affect little to nothing doesn't appeal to me and doesn't make me more likely to play a WRPG over a JRPG. And frankly JRPG stories I like better; I like having a coherent solid narrative instead of one so severely diluted as to be a shadow of itself (and sometimes downright confusing) because it has to be that way to make your "choices" seem real.

That's fine, I'm just saying that more could be done in JRPGs to draw you into the linear storyline, and yes this can all be achieved without "arbitrary" role-playing choices. I hate to say it, but JRPGs should really look to FPS games for storytelling techniques (now before you flame me, I'm talking about techniques, not the actual stories). You mentioned Half Life earlier. Well there's a game that turned an extremely cliche/simple story into something engaging just through presentation alone. It was totally linear too, with no player-choice whatsoever.

Also, I don't want to get too side-tracked on this point, but don't try to act like WRPGs don't have deep stories as well. I can understand if prefer the aesthetics of Japanese stories better, or if you don't like the fact that WRPGs' stories require a lot of "work" on the part of the player (you usually have to uncover the story through, you know, actual gameplay), but you're just kidding yourself if you really think JRPG stories have more substance to them.

Edit: Hm, maybe I'll give it a try then. I think I saw quite a few used copies for sale the last time I was at a VG store.

Edit 2:

This - good post. I have given JRPGs a few tries, but frankly, they always disappoint me and I end up feeling like I wasted my cash for no good reason (even if I get them from a bargin bin). I like my games to be, you know, GAMEs, not a novel without even the presence of choice (even if there is no actual choice). If I wanted a novel in visual form, I'd watch a movie...or read a novel and use my imagination. At least that is meant to be a story telling medium that offers no illustion of interactivity or control.

Exactly, my problem is not with linearity so much as the fact that the "video game" part of most JRPGs doesn't add anything to the overall narrative (and if the narrative is what you came for, that's a big problem). Even if Fallout 3 were completely linear, the gameplay still supports the story's themes of desperation and survival. That's something I'd like to see in more JRPGs.

 

[Helba1984]

I really don't care for being presented the illusion of interactivity. I play an RPG for the storyline, so being able to make arbitrary "Role-Playing" choices that in reality affect little to nothing doesn't appeal to me and doesn't make me more likely to play a WRPG over a JRPG. And frankly JRPG stories I like better; I like having a coherent solid narrative instead of one so severely diluted as to be a shadow of itself (and sometimes downright confusing) because it has to be that way to make your "choices" seem real.

That's fine, I'm just saying that more could be done in JRPGs to draw you into the linear storyline, and yes this can all be achieved without "arbitrary" role-playing choices. I hate to say it, but JRPGs should really look to FPS games for storytelling techniques (now before you flame me, I'm talking about techniques, not the actual stories). You mentioned Half Life earlier. Well there's a game that turned an extremely cliche/simple story into something engaging just through presentation alone. It was totally linear too, with no player-choice whatsoever.

Also, I don't want to get too side-tracked on this point, but don't try to act like WRPGs don't have deep stories as well. I can understand if prefer the aesthetics of Japanese stories better, or if you don't like the fact that WRPGs' stories require a lot of "work" on the part of the player (you usually have to uncover the story through, you know, actual gameplay), but you're just kidding yourself if you really think JRPG stories have more substance to them.

Edit: Hm, maybe I'll give it a try then. I think I saw quite a few used copies for sale the last time I was at a VG store.

Exactly, that's what half life was but I always hear some fanboy yelling about how it had all these choices; it was an illusion, nothing more. And being able to walk away from a character during a cutscene isn't innovation, it's a way for the impatient to not hear and/or care about the narrative.

I would say that Xenosaga has a storyline about 20x deeper than mass effect or even DA:O.

Play through the trilogy and then form your opinion

Yeah I was sad about that. I LOVE cross edge

 

[Eclipse Dragon]

There's actually a huge variety in the style of jrpgs, the problem is, when ever I get into a conversation about them even with "hardcore" gamers, they've usually never even heard of the SMT games. When most people think of jrpgs, they think of Final Fantasy, and that's what causes the stereotype. Even Square has Star Ocean, which, oh look has a choice system and character interactivity.