What do you look for in JRPGs?

[Milanezi]

Gorgeous CGI and top-notch graphics. I quit the stories, they're either similar one to another with all the drama and values, or they simply don't make much sense. The combat system itself I downright dislike, I simply tolerate it (I'm looking forward to this Final Fantasy XIV thing on PS4 if it ever shows up, the one that has what looks like action combat). So I focus on Final Fantasy, for all its shine. The only two JRPGs I ever truly loved were Lost Odyssey and FF VIII, something about them just seemed right on spot for my tastes... However, I've always wondered why JRPGs are considered "role playing", I mean, I'm role playing there as much as I could role play a soldier in Call of Duty, and don't tell me it's the open world, cause if that's the case, the GTA is a role play as well. I'm not trolling or trying to stir up anything, it's just that I don't get "role play" when you have almost zero degree of input on your character per se...

 

[Someone Depressing]

I like pickier things.

I can pick my main character's stats everytime s/he levels up. I especially hate RNGs when it comes to RPGs, which is one of the reasons why Earthbound could have been better (all the wit and charm couldn't save Paula getting a higher Offense than Ness. Still a great game, though)

Multiple choices that effect story. While this is more a WRPG thing (compare Skyrim to Shin Megami Tensei. While they both have choices and elements of freedom, Skyrim's entire gameplay is based on dicking around and developing your own character, whereas SMT focuses on the development of those around you, ect) everygame would probably be better with it, as if gives the player a greater feel of impact on their choices. Just fucked over the entire world? Up yours. We just deleted your last save file, so haha, no going back.

Character development. One of the main issues with Persona 1 is that everybody except the main character, Yuki, and Maki, remain 1-dimensinal cardboard cutouts. And then Persona 2 happened. It was better, but Eikichi... Eikichi is just... bland. Other than his fallouts with his dad, he plays the role of the straight man to the rest of the party of personified Oedipus complexes. Then Persona 3 happened, and Atlus learned that giving people a tragic background doesn't give them character development. Pretty much everyone has crippling parental issues, self insecurities, or mind-blowing guilt. Leave me the fuck alone, go see a therapist. And then 4 came along and only the party members were interesting. I guess I should say that Atlus can't write, but it seems like 5'll change that.

captcha: work out. Damn you.

 

[Arqus_Zed]

1) Engaging story with interesting characters in a well-developed setting.

2) Enjoyable, balanced combat.

3) A fun and expansive skill/equipment mechanic.

4) Variation with good pacing; I want combat, exploration, conversation, shopping, skill advancement, equipping, cut-scenes, mini-games and puzzles.

 

[Kittyhawk]

I've kind of gone off jrpgs because they've largely become so cookie cutter. They could be so much more than what they are, but devs play it safe and sell to their current audience.

When more jrpg devs get jrpg up to the level of Mass Effect, Dragon Age etc, and try different stuff I'll play them more.

My gem of late has been and still is Dragons Dogma. This is a game that's trying to be something more than rehashed cliches and fan service. Its characters could do with some work, though. Persona series is cool but I feel it too is going to become another Ouroborous, like FF where its used so much that nothing else is really attempted. This is more likely now that Atlus are part of Sega.

 

[WeepingAngels]

- I will spend most of my time in battle so I need a good, fast battle system.

- I like to grind so I want to always have a grinding spot available

- Don't pander to the "I hate grinding" crowd by removing the ability to grind (looking at you Lost Odyssey)

- Most JRPG stories suck but character interaction and development is what's important. The characters should gradually change throughout the game and their interaction should be well written and voice acted

- I prefer earning ability points after each battle to be applied to things like Espers, Materia, GF's etc... to Bioware's solution of giving us a new ability for each level up. The perks of Skyrim never grew on me either.

- I hate low level caps. I think it's just lazy and the idea (Bioware) that there is only so much exp to be had is very unmotivating, this goes back to being unable to grind

- I have grown to dislike bosses with multiple forms that you have to defeat. Give me more bosses instead of a boss that takes 20 minutes to defeat because he keeps getting an HP infusion with each form change.

- I prefer random battles. Here's why, I don't skip battles anyway so having enemies on screen only serves to dirty up the environment. Having enemies on screen isn't a deal breaker though.

- I love oldschool JRPG's but I don't miss the mazes.

- I really have come to hate so many sidequests. So many that you need a journal to keep up with them all. Think back to Final Fantasy VI, it had sidequests for optional characters but they really were side quests. Modern RPG's, W and J have so many sidequests that you not only need a journal but will spend far more time on the sidequests than the main story. I doubt that I am explaining this well but I hope people understand.

 

[Guest-Z]

To me the question sounds like "What did I like most about Chrono Trigger", which I still consider the best jRPG, and the answer is immersion and sense of a grand adventure with a story that *makes sense* (not like e.g. FF IX, which was perfect until the last quarter of the game). Also some adventure and exploration elements and a good dose of mystery.

On the gameplay side of things it should have a good and engaging combat system, preferably without random encounters and random equipment.

Speaking of equipment, I absolutely hate games that constantly give you equipment 0.01% better than what you currently have (a la Xenogears or Mass Effect series), I'd much rather have harder to obtain, but longer lasting equipment (CT, Fallout series) which gives you more satisfaction than the stupid scaled-to-your-level junk, which just linearizes your progress and robs you of any sense of accomplishment.

And as a bonus there could be less of those typical jRPG moments when you feel awkward and embarrassed just by playing the game in front of someone not familiar with the game (you all know what I mean)...

 

[Vegosiux]

- Tactical turn-based combat with a nice twist; for example what Agarest does with extended areas

- Believable characters, personal drama not required (and indeed, shouldn't be too present)

- Experimentation! Sure, grinding for stuff can be fun sometimes, but even better if it lets you craft other stuff with unpredictable results.

- Let me level as high as I want, cap it at overflow danger or something.

- A lot of fourth-wall breaking. Really, JRPGs are awesome for that.

 

[Exhuminator]

In order of importance:

Excellent combat system with strategic capabilities (and preferably a quick pace).

Well realized world that is fun to explore.

Main characters that don't grate on my nerves.

A plot that goes outside the typical "teenagers save the world" crud.

Medium to high level of difficulty, I don't like "press A to win" JRPGs much.

A good soundtrack that adds immersion to the experience.

 

[Yopaz]

Storytelling is probably my major thing here.

Now I prefer JRPGs over western RPGs because of the storytelling. Now I'm not a good judge of story quality, but the storytelling I've come to see in western RPGs has usually been in the shape of dialogues, choices and reading things to get the context. When I played Mass Effect I realized I was soon skipping all the talking and thus I ended up with a bland shooter with a skill tree.

Some games also present the story through letters and talking to random people which means I have to actively seek out these things. I don't mind written dialogues, but I get bored if I have to read a few dozens letters.

Now Tales of Vesperia on the other hand presents story through cutscenes, skits occurring at certain points, conversations and most importantly it's linear without any choices. It might not technically be an RPG because it kinda removes the role playing element, but I personally think that branching stories make the overall story suffer. That's why the most common books are the ones you read from cover to cover rather than choose your own adventure style.

I don't like being the character, I want the character to be fully fleshed out to match the story and by giving me the choice to do what I would do that doesn't really apply. Neither can a game actually manage to suit all of our personalities anyway.

Combat has to make sense and that's it really. I've played so many games with awful combat, but as long as it makes sense then I can master it. If it just keeps throwing new things at me making it feel like the game is mainly serving as a combat system tutorial for the final boss then it's likely that I won't beat it.

That said there are no sure things that make me like any game.

 

[WeepingAngels]

- Tactical turn-based combat with a nice twist; for example what Agarest does with extended areas

- Believable characters, personal drama not required (and indeed, shouldn't be too present)

- Experimentation! Sure, grinding for stuff can be fun sometimes, but even better if it lets you craft other stuff with unpredictable results.

- Let me level as high as I want, cap it at overflow danger or something.

- A lot of fourth-wall breaking. Really, JRPGs are awesome for that.

Oh I loved that fourth wall stuff in Secret of Evermore. You are talking to a doomsday prophet (this is in an ancient land) and if you keep talking to him he eventually says:

"Somebody is watching over us...controlling us. It's true, I tell you. It's True! We are merely sprites that dance at the beck and call of our button pressing overlord! This is a video game. Don't you see? We are characters in a video game!"

...and then your character says "This guy is a nut case!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1HDmSUMD32Q

 

[GabeZhul]

Story and characters are the first, followed by functional gameplay, then visual aesthetics and finally music. This order becomes obvious if you go at them backwards, presuming that everything else on the list is excellent:

-If the music and sound design of a JRPG is bad, it generally doesn't impact my enjoyment of the title much.

-If the visual aesthetics of a JRPG are bad, it hampers my enjoyment, but as long as everything else fits I am willing to disregard it.

-If the gameplay is boring or otherwise non-functional, but everything else is great, then I would probably still play a JRPG, even if in just small bursts.

-However, even if everything else is perfect, I will drop a JRPG if it has a banal or otherwise badly written story or an unlikable cast.

 

[Mister K]

Since those are JRPG's we are talking about, my prefferences are as following:

1. Characters. I can forgive plot-holes, or other story problems as long as I like the main cast.

2. Story. If I say that I can cut some slack to games' story, that does not mean that it's unimportant to me. My only request for the story is that I must be willing to find out how it ends.

3. Turn-based combat. I think of JRPG as of most relaxing one, as the one that requires tactic more than reaction, thus I prefer this battle system.

4. Semi-random encounters. I don't like when the game requires too much grinding, but I also do not like when I do not have an option to grind. For me, Persona 3 and 4 are the best in this department, because they have constantly respawning enemies, but you can avoid fighting them by running away if you wish so.

 

[Kittyhawk]

With most jrpgs:

1. Characters are usually the same tropes found in anime, which means the all look and sound the same for the most part.

2. Story is usually save the town, land, kingdom, world. Very boring after 20+ years. Exceptions made for Soul Nomad, Parasite Eve and Persona 4. I'll make and also excuse games that really try.

3. Turn based combat is archaic. Sure, it can be fun but its a thing of the past, from when tech was limited.

4: With todays tech, we shouldn't need random encounters anymore.

With all the above combined, they don't form Captain Planet (neigh, if only), but mostly mix to hold jrpgs back from growing and evolving. I also believe that because Square shunned action (as well as action rpgs) games for so long, it has in turn hurt the whole japanese side of the industry, as many devs play a safe game of 'follow the leader'. It truly is a shame, because by now we should have had an epic jrpg, like a japanese Mass Effect or Dragon Age.

Hope that will be The Last Guardian, but it certainly isn't a FF game.

 

[aelreth]

I would have to say it's the after story. When you still feel that it's worth playing after you went through the main storyline.

 

[Chaos Isaac]

Characters. Story. Art/Design. Gameplay.

That's pretty much it. Though in some cases, like Dark Souls, Gameplay may be more important.

 

[Shadow flame master]

All it has to do is be in my price range and be remotely interesting. I also have to be sure if I really want to play it and not its updated re-release, like the Persona series.

It also shouldn't be in the media as "The X we wanted and the game Y should have been" because then for some reason I want it to fail partly because some of us don't have any memories of when game series Z was in its golden days.

Ten points for whoever guesses what new localized game I'm talking about.

 

[ScrabbitRabbit]

With most jrpgs:

1. Characters are usually the same tropes found in anime, which means the all look and sound the same for the most part.

2. Story is usually save the town, land, kingdom, world. Very boring after 20+ years. Exceptions made for Soul Nomad, Parasite Eve and Persona 4. I'll make and also excuse games that really try.

Archetypal characters and cliché "save the [thing]!" plots are problems with storytelling in all games. Other genres have their own overused tropes, too.

3. Turn based combat is archaic. Sure, it can be fun but its a thing of the past, from when tech was limited.

Why is a gameplay style that evolved out of limitations inherently a bad thing? If it's enjoyable isn't the most important thing?

Just because we CAN do flashy action combat now doesn't mean we HAVE to. They're two completely different experiences. I'm not always in the mood for an action game.

4: With todays tech, we shouldn't need random encounters anymore.

Random encounters can be annoying (only like 'em in dungeon crawlers) but most recent JRPGs have actually ditched them. There are still a few around that use them but, for the most part, they ARE a thing of the past.

 

[Kittyhawk]

Turn based is archaic. I get that it still works and is still used. Most recent examples in my collection are Shadowrun Returns and X-Com Enemy Unknown. Both excellent games and neither is a jrpg, and turn based works for them as it has done for Front Mission etc.

I feel that too many jrpgs have used it as a crutch, to aid walking than try something else. I guess its all about the execution too.