JRPG don't need to be WRPG. *Read post, before posting*

[Raziel_Likes_Souls]

Man, I haven't seen an enjoyable JRPG since Crisis Core. What happened? I haven't played a good WRPG since Fallout 3. What happened? Both genre's aren't really doing much, asides having occasionally good releases, like Demon Souls and Mass Effect. So, they're both tied in staleness at the moment. So, not only do JRPG's need something innovative, but so do WRPG's, because it's either create a character, fuck around an open world, doing missions that reveal a boring, cliched story, or have a character created for you, and run around watching cutscenes for 60 hours. Fallout 3 is the only WRPG I've been able to get into lately, and even that's kind of stale sometimes. And for JRPGs, I've only played FF XIII recently, so, 2010 isn't a good year for RPG's. The amount of good RPGs seems to have become less consistent.

 

[cj_iwakura]

There's great JRPGs that have nothing to do with the same-old crap you find in the Final Fantasies and the cookie cutter type, you just have to look for them.

To name a few: Shadow Hearts, anything with SMT(Nocturne and Digital Devil Saga particularly), the Persona series(name another JRPG that takes place in modern day Japan focusing on a newspaper editor stalking a serial killer), Demon's Souls, etc.

 

[veloper]

Deus Ex certainly offered choice, and in my opinion did it far better than KOTOR. Even then, the story was still fairly linear throughout (killing a character at one point as opposed to another has very little actual effect on the story), the number of choices you got to make developing JC wasn't huge (considering that the augs were either-one-or-the-other affairs: you couldn't install Melee Upgrade and Strenth Upgrade, for instance). Most of the choice in that game simply came from whether you wanted to play Rambo style or Splinter Cell style.

The brilliance of Deus Ex was in that it didn't point out all the choices you had, unlike your typical Bioware games where the choices are laid out for you in dialogue trees (most of them being fake anyway). So in DX you could go against perceived flow of the story and then if you succeeded, see the game react and make a small adjustments to the story.
I reckon most players didn't even discover you could save the russian Lebedev and change sides earlier. I guess that's also a downside to the DX scheme. It was great for players who made the discovery themselves.
Good stuff.

I can't think of many others atm, apart from The Witcher, which truth betold I've not played yet, so I can't really comment.

Point being, even in the West, very few games manage to take the idea of choice and actually use it well. Most of the time it's simply used as an idiotic way of either turning your character into a shining angel or a slavering hellspawn.

Here's a couple more for you: VTM Bloodlines, Arcanum, Fallout 1 & 2.
Even Dragon Age and ME1&2 do this to a lesser extent, moving away from the myth of pure good vs pure evil.

I do think the genre is stagnating, and needs some fresh ideas. And I'm certainly all for introducing greater character customization as long as it is appropriate. A game like Final Fantasy IX, for instance, wouldn't work with customization like that (what the series calls the Job system) simply because the character classes don't just affect the gameplay, but are also examined in the game's stories and themes. Zidane isn't just a thief in battle, he's a thief full time, and some of the other characters are quick to judge him on it.

I reckon it's entirely possible to make a very good and original game keeping with any and all of the characteristics that make up the JRPG:
turn-based combat (with or without timer), party (of 4 characters), linear story, anime style, world maps and combat screens, random encounters on the overworld, basic XP leveling scheme.

All it takes is tactical depth to make the gameplay good and for that devs can look at games like UFO, JA2, KotC, ToEE and the pen&paper D&D(3E and 4E)for inspiration.

Reduce the grind and make the exploration part full of optional paths with unique equipment at the ends and you got your replay value right there too.
Then write good dialogues and don't pick random people of the streets to do the voice overs and voila: instant GOTY material.


The problem is that JRPGs ARE innovating: in the wrong direction. Doing away with the party and making the gameplay action-based is a waste.
While this has resulted in one great game sofar (Demon's Souls), there is no lack of action RPGs. Which brings me to another point: innovate(or rather hybridize) the game too much and you nolonger have a JRPG, but something else. DS is not a JRPG.

Worse than the decline of the JRPG is that it may take the SRPG genre with it (FF tactics being the most well known title in the genre).
The west have dropped the ball on tactical rpgs long ago, but the japs are fortunately still sticking with their SRPGs. Question is for how long under the current trend.

I also think it's a little unfair to accuse JRPGs of not changing art styles when WRPGs, as I mentioned, are still almost entirely in thrall to Lord Of The Rings. You can paint your elves as a segregated minority, or your orcs as misunderstood warriors, at the end of the day they're still elves and orcs, and a bit more variety wouldn't hurt.

Setting isn't the same thing as the art style. Also: VTM, KOTOR, ME, Arcanum, fallout, JE. No orcs or elves in sight.
Anime will do perfectly aslong as the gameplay is good.

I'd rather see both the WRPG and JRPG stagnate and go back to their roots, than seeing it the games getting dumbed down further.

 

[Negatempest]

My problem with JRPG's...was the god awful choice to stick with turn-based attacks for decades. Kingdom Hearts was a HUGE, HUGE!!!! step in being both a great story, linearity, no player choice BUT removed turned based combat.

Not played Secret of Mana, Y's, Illusion of Gaia, Secret of Evermore, Dragon View, Brave Fencer Musashi, Alundra, Tales of Destiny, Star Ocean, etc... have you?

Kingdom Hearts was clearly not the first Action RPG from Japan.

Heck, it's hard to define the FF "ATB system" (4,5,6,7,8,9,12,13) as pure turn-based anyhow. There is an action element in having the enemies not wait for you. Dragon Quest is a good example of a pure Turn Based system. FFX is as well (and damn that game was easy for it).

OP: If all JRPGs were exactly like DQ, then it could be claimed they are stagnant.

Maverick: My wall o' text hehe!

Brave Fencer Musashi more of an Action/RPG hybrid. Alundra was quite fun, I remember it as a PS1 game correct or was that Alundra 2? Played Star Ocean: Second Story, no turn based and quite a good example of JRPG could move in a non WRPG kind of way.

 

[irequirefood]

JRPG's need to stay. We already have WRPG's and that's all dandy. Some innovation would be nice, but not so much that they lose what makes them a JRPG.

Now if we could somehow make a game that is both combined, and does it so well it tramples over everything!

 

[Quaidis]

Honestly, I think JRPGs have become too mud-blooded for their own good. I wish there were more games of the past, before cut-scenes became the next big thing. They don't have to be flat screened 2d, or entirely turn-based. They could have game-play like Zelda or Ys (bumping into enemies) or ChronoTrigger, or FF7+, or the Tales Of series. There could be some new game-play mechanic. But ever since cut-scenes were invested, the over all stories in games have gone to shit. The dungeons and levels have become bland. The experience has become watered down.

Now, all the game developers care about is how pretty the game looks and how animated or expensive the cut-scenes are. Now you only have to go down corridors and the game will play itself in movie format for you.

That's what I hate.

So yeah, jrpgs should look back on the past and glean from it, not head blindly into the future.

 

[icame]

Idk, the first Jrpg I played was FF13 (I know, I know, i had just gotten away from only playing wow.) and it pretty much killed any enthusiasm i had about the genre as I had Heard the Final Fantasy series was the pinnacle of JRPG's. At least now i know that to be wrong.

But yeah, JRPG's don't need to become WRPG's, they just need to do something to feel fresh again. Though i would like to suggest Most Jrpg's to take a kint from Xenosaga (I know it didn't do it first) by not having a billion drop down menu's and just put them on the face buttons. Or they could try Real time combat.

 

[jpoon]

Without a doubt I have a lot more fun playing WRPG's than almost any current JRPG. JRPG's just don't really do it for me as much as they used to, before WRPG's showed us how much better a game can be than the chore that is your average JRPG.

I think they all should just keep in mind one thing...is this game even fun? While this is entirely based on opinion, you have to agree that many elements of a game are just plain enjoyable, while others are just fucking annoying.

I don't think JRPG's need to become WRPG's but they should not be afraid to borrow good elements from others and improve their games. The same goes for WRPG's, I have no problem with them borrowing good elements from JRPG's if it produces something more compelling and entertaining.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

man where is s69-5? normally he would be the leader of such a thread, i was anticipating seeing his wall of text to defend jrpg with all his might.

snip of mighty wisdom

good stuff! i might have to try out a few of those games you mentioned (demon souls i have tried, it took a hell of a lot of time, too much for me at the time i was playing it but if i ever find a month where im not working i might pick it up again)

also i might have to try that trinity universe, it sounds interesting, and i never played the first two worlds, so i might have to give that a go.

 

[Ken Sapp]

snip

I never claimed otherwise. The great thing about it being an RPG is that you are there to play a role and you can play it. How many RPGs can you name where you are 'the only one who can save the world'? Let's face it, in Oblivion it was fate that you got stuck in the cell which housed the Emperor's escape route. As soon as you leave, that moment of fate is over and you're a speck in a big world. You can choose to follow the story or ignore it and pave your own way. You can't impact the main story, but that's because you're insignificant. You are a means to and end and nothing more. Martin was important, the Emperor was important.

So many games put you in the shoes of the only hero who can save the world because deep down most people, if not all, want to be the Hero rather than the one who aids him from the background. Personally, Oblivion became boring to me far too quickly and I stopped playing. I don't know what it was but something was missing.

 

[auronvi]

JRPGs are great, but they're not true RPGs, since they almost always just stick you in the role of a predetermined character (i.e. you get no control over character creation), and the story is linear (i.e. you get no control over the story). You're not "role playing" any more than you are in action games or shooters.

I hate this arguement...

Where does the word ROLE imply freedom? An RPG can BE an RPG with linear story telling elements and no character creation.

I agree that JRPGs need to change but I also don't think they should just change into what everyone is already playing. I thought Final Fantasy XII was a step in the right direction but everyone hated on it so much the company was afraid to try something new and then we got the railroad of a game we call Final Fantasy XIII.

I like my Final Fantasy but the day they start making the bland, everyman hero main character (The John Shepard Character) and follow him intimately through his life on a fantasy world is the day I stop liking Final Fantasy. We'll see, I trust some Japanese developer will come out with something good. FF vs XIII is what I'm waiting for.

 

[rockyoumonkeys]

JRPGs are great, but they're not true RPGs, since they almost always just stick you in the role of a predetermined character (i.e. you get no control over character creation), and the story is linear (i.e. you get no control over the story). You're not "role playing" any more than you are in action games or shooters.

I hate this arguement...

Where does the word ROLE imply freedom? An RPG can BE an RPG with linear story telling elements and no character creation.

Sigh. I hate this argument.

In order for what you say to be true, you have to basically say that ALL video games are RPGs. In Super Mario Bros, you are "role playing" Mario. In Madden, you are "role playing" football players. In Need For Speed, you are "role playing" a race car driver.

So...really? You're basically rendering the term "RPG" completely meaningless with your argument. Or are you now going to start adding qualifiers to your definition until it finally encompasses only the games YOU want it to represent?

 

[Akihiko]

JRPGs are great, but they're not true RPGs, since they almost always just stick you in the role of a predetermined character (i.e. you get no control over character creation), and the story is linear (i.e. you get no control over the story). You're not "role playing" any more than you are in action games or shooters.

I hate this arguement...

Where does the word ROLE imply freedom? An RPG can BE an RPG with linear story telling elements and no character creation.

Sigh. I hate this argument.

In order for what you say to be true, you have to basically say that ALL video games are RPGs. In Super Mario Bros, you are "role playing" Mario. In Madden, you are "role playing" football players. In Need For Speed, you are "role playing" a race car driver.

So...really? You're basically rendering the term "RPG" completely meaningless with your argument. Or are you now going to start adding qualifiers to your definition until it finally encompasses only the games YOU want it to represent?

The fact of the matter is the term Role-Playing Game is so vague that everyone has to make their own definition of what one is. I personally think BOTH WRPGs and JRPGs are both equally RPGs. They both require you to choose how you do things, just in JRPGs it's more to do with what you wear, what you use, and how you fight. I also hate the idea that you have to create a character to play a role. The term Role-Playing Game does not suggest that in the slightest.

 

[Fidelias]

JRPG's don't need to change their style, they just need to get their ass in gear and try to make something GOOD for a change. The only recent JRPG's that I've played that are actually any good are either re-released or remakes. WRPG's are on the rise right now because they've improved on everything in the last few years and are visibly(not sure if that's the word I'm going for but fuck it it's 12 o' clock) trying to improve themselves even more.

Edit: By the way, here are my thoughts on what it means for a game to be classified as a "Role-playing Game"

Any game that places emphasis on it's characters, story, and/or atmosphere as opposed to gameplay or cinematics. I don't believe that an RPG MUST allow you to make decisions or be non-linear (though I prefer these).

 

[Fusioncode9]

I enjoy both JRPG's and WRPG's. Final Fantasy 13, in my opinion, was a great game despite the linearity. JRPS's I play for a good story. WRPG's I play for freedom. I'm happy with both