I will never play a JRPG by Square Enix again until they get rid of turn based combat, and make it good(not that shit infinite undiscovery)and NEW writers. I call FF13 bullshit modified turnbased combat. Now the Tales JRPGs fucking rock.
Yes... the term RPG in itself is meaningless and a terrible name for a genre. JRPGs were the ONLY RPG video games for many generations. Everything by Square Soft and Enix from the Super Nintendo and before. They were pretty much the only ones making good RPGs. They are the games the developers of todays games were playing when they were kids.rockyoumonkeys said:Sigh. I hate this argument.auronvi said:I hate this arguement...rockyoumonkeys said: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.
Where does the word ROLE imply freedom? An RPG can BE an RPG with linear story telling elements and no character creation.
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?
^^ This man has wisdom.Fusioncode9 said: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
That is entirely the fault of that particular writer rather than the genre/game design. The fact of the matter is, linearity allows for significantly more precise and tight storytelling. It won't inherently make the story better, and there's pros and cons to both, but a linear game is significantly easier for the writer to create set pieces and the like that have real impact. Simply put, it's easier to tell a story when you don't have to worry about branching paths, which (theoretically) should lead to a higher quality story over all.Savagezion said:I also disagree about "epic story" is the reason you are not allowed options. There may be epic moments in some of them but overall they round out. Japanese romance is torture to watch and has bad writing all over it usually. Their charactors tend to be a mix between stereotypes or just very 2 dimensional. Now it isn't just JRPGs that suffer from this, alot of games in general do. But that is my point. No JPRG story stands out as anything exceptional to what else we have out there in any other genre or even just the RPG genre. It is about on par. It isn't like the "epicness" of JRPGs story puts even the rest of the RPGs on the market to shame. If anything it blends just like the rest.
As a huge fan of JRPGs I agree they need to find their own innovation. Creatable characters are starting to show up in JRPGs a lot lately and this is a good step forward in my opinion. I'd like the games to just have more sidequests that are relevant to the story without being necessary. The story is the base of the JRPG pizza and the combat whether it's turn-based or action based is the chesse. Character creation is 1 good topping to add to the pizza and I think more robust and story enhancing sidequest can be another good topping and online parties like in Blue Dragon Awakened Shadows and Dragon Quest IX are another great topping too. There are probably some other things that could be done without bending to the will of the majority but still be appealing to them. All we need to do is leave them alone to make what they want instead of what Bioware and Bethesda want. I can't help but think Bioware and Bethesda rag on them because they are a threat to them and if they try to copy western games, they'll run themselves into the ground because of lack of diversity. I know I'm using pizza as my premise, but I'm hungry and want pizza.Korten12 said:I think they need to find their own unique innovation to make them fresh again without having to make them WRPG.
I love JRPGs. I just don't think they're true RPGs, that's all. As someone else said, it's a vague term that's become almost meaningless over time due to misuse.auronvi said:If you don't like JRPGs then don't play 'em but to call them "not true RPGs" is just ignorant.
That was Lufia, they had that dungeon with randomly generated floors and treasure that just kept going down and down and down O_O.s69-5 said:Great game. Loved how they did Lufia 2 as a prequel. Made complete sense in terms of the story in that series.Garak73 said:The first RPG I ever played was a JRPG. Lufia 1 on the SNES so I can't really swallow the idea that only WRPG's are real RPG's.
My only complaint was that you had to select groups of enemy types, instead of single enemies (unless they weren't in a group), to attack. Made it less exact and the computer would sometimes attack the wrong individual in a group (ie. not finishing off a weakened foe).
Was it Lufia that had that deep dungeon with an insane amount of floors, basically acting as one of the earliest examples of post-game bonus dungeon content (even though it was available before endgame)? Or was that another SNES RPG?
"..."Agayek said:That is entirely the fault of that particular writer rather than the genre/game design. The fact of the matter is, linearity allows for significantly more precise and tight storytelling. It won't inherently make the story better, and there's pros and cons to both, but a linear game is significantly easier for the writer to create set pieces and the like that have real impact. Simply put, it's easier to tell a story when you don't have to worry about branching paths, which (theoretically) should lead to a higher quality story over all.Savagezion said:I also disagree about "epic story" is the reason you are not allowed options. There may be epic moments in some of them but overall they round out. Japanese romance is torture to watch and has bad writing all over it usually. Their charactors tend to be a mix between stereotypes or just very 2 dimensional. Now it isn't just JRPGs that suffer from this, alot of games in general do. But that is my point. No JPRG story stands out as anything exceptional to what else we have out there in any other genre or even just the RPG genre. It is about on par. It isn't like the "epicness" of JRPGs story puts even the rest of the RPGs on the market to shame. If anything it blends just like the rest.
The problem, as I see it, is probably primarily cultural. JRPG stories are typically very... emasculated, for lack of a better word. It's a product of Japanese culture which doesn't transfer to the West very well.
What I would like to see for the genre would be to hire creative teams from the West. Not necessarily developers, but the people that come up with the overarching story and character designs. Get some foreign story ideas in, then bring in the Final Fantasy (or whatever) team in and let them go to town. It would solve a lot of the issues I have with most JRPGs nowadays.
Edit:
They don't even have to go that far though. I'd be perfectly happy with just new character designs. In just about every JRPG in the last 5-10 years, there's set stereotypes that every member of your party will more or less fit into, ranging from "Whiny Hero" to "Entirely-too-happy Girl". I'm just sick of playing the adventures of the cast of FFVII over and over again.