778 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I think the reason people call DA2 a JRPG (and the reason I think it's very much like a JRPG) is because JRPGs typically don't allow the player to influence the portrayal of his character. JRPG characters often speak without prompting, or have only one dialogue option (so the player's input is limited to pressing "Continue").

JRPGs define the PC for me. Western RPGs let me do that. That's the relevant difference, and that's why I don't like JRPGs.

I think you are just seeing what you want to see.

Are you denying that JRPGs defined the PC for me, or are you denying that western RPGs let me do it?

Western RPGs clearly do let me do it, because I've been doing exactly that for 25 years.

[jillabender]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

I think you are just seeing what you want to see.

Are you denying that JRPGs defined the PC for me, or are you denying that western RPGs let me do it?

Western RPGs clearly do let me do it, because I've been doing exactly that for 25 years.

I could be wrong, but I think BobSmith meant that there's more to jRPGs than just having a set protagonist.

[Sylvius the Mad]

jillabender wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

I think you are just seeing what you want to see.

Are you denying that JRPGs defined the PC for me, or are you denying that western RPGs let me do it?

Western RPGs clearly do let me do it, because I've been doing exactly that for 25 years.

I could be wrong, but I think BobSmith meant that there's more to jRPGs than just having a set protagonist.

He may well, but that's irrelevant.  That's the thing about JRPGs I dislike.

[Cimeas]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

jillabender wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

I think you are just seeing what you want to see.

Are you denying that JRPGs defined the PC for me, or are you denying that western RPGs let me do it?

Western RPGs clearly do let me do it, because I've been doing exactly that for 25 years.

I could be wrong, but I think BobSmith meant that there's more to jRPGs than just having a set protagonist.

He may well, but that's irrelevant.  That's the thing about JRPGs I dislike.

a JRPG is a Japanese Role-Playing game.

How can Dragon Age 2 be a JRPG when it was made in Canada?

Also, Sylvius, I'm surprised you even stick to the definition 'RPG' at all.   After all you were the one who said 'I don't consider RPGs 'games' really' or something to that effect, when you continously call them just that by using the term 'RPG in the first place. 

[Jerrybnsn]

I'm playing a jrpg right now that's adopted a wrpg artistic presentation; Dragon's Dogma. Anyone heard of it? What I like about it is that it has that original FF IV of just grinding it out in the country side, building up xp and coin.

[AkiKishi]

bEVEsthda wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

bEVEsthda wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...
Heres a question for you. How many JRPGs have you played?

Wouldn't that totally depend on what is meant by a "JRPG" ?

Please explain, what a JRPG is to you, and what separates it from a WRPG.

The question was put to you so why would my definition matter?

To avoid circular reasoning.

Like you dodging the question and editing my quote in your post?

[AkiKishi]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I think the reason people call DA2 a JRPG (and the reason I think it's very much like a JRPG) is because JRPGs typically don't allow the player to influence the portrayal of his character. JRPG characters often speak without prompting, or have only one dialogue option (so the player's input is limited to pressing "Continue").

JRPGs define the PC for me. Western RPGs let me do that. That's the relevant difference, and that's why I don't like JRPGs.

I think you are just seeing what you want to see.

Are you denying that JRPGs defined the PC for me, or are you denying that western RPGs let me do it?

Western RPGs clearly do let me do it, because I've been doing exactly that for 25 years.

That would make CoD and 90% of games JRPGS....

[AkiKishi]

Jerrybnsn wrote...

I'm playing a jrpg right now that's adopted a wrpg artistic presentation; Dragon's Dogma. Anyone heard of it? What I like about it is that it has that original FF IV of just grinding it out in the country side, building up xp and coin.

The demo grew on your after ?

[bEVEsthda]

Cimeas wrote...
a JRPG is a Japanese Role-Playing game.

How can Dragon Age 2 be a JRPG when it was made in Canada?

If your opinion is that a JRPG is any, and only any, RPG that is made in Japan, then it can't be, of course.

But why would one adobt a label that doesn't consider the content, mechanics or player-experience?

The term JRPG didn't spring into existence because they started making RPGs in Japan. It exists because there was a need to make a distinction, because though these games were labeled RPG, they were much different.

[Jerrybnsn]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Jerrybnsn wrote...

I'm playing a jrpg right now that's adopted a wrpg artistic presentation; Dragon's Dogma. Anyone heard of it? What I like about it is that it has that original FF IV of just grinding it out in the country side, building up xp and coin.

The demo grew on your after ?

I watched a review video of the game that expounded on it much more than what the demo offered.  I can see that gamers that need strong storylines won't like this game, but it actually has a nostalgia of the original crpg for me.www.youtube.com/watch

[Cimeas]

I'm actually very much enjoying Two Worlds 2 right now. There's a sense of satisfaction about slowly building up from a nobody into a powerhouse of awesome-ness.

Anyway, the term JRPG was created to give a name to turn-based RPGs from Japan which generally focused on FMV cutscenes and less player choice. The term could not be applied to DA2, however, because even if it was a turn-based RPG with no choices, it's not from Japan, which is a pretty key part of the name, don't you think?

[bEVEsthda]

BobSmith101 wrote...

bEVEsthda wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

bEVEsthda wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...
Heres a question for you. How many JRPGs have you played?

Wouldn't that totally depend on what is meant by a "JRPG" ?

Please explain, what a JRPG is to you, and what separates it from a WRPG.

The question was put to you so why would my definition matter?

To avoid circular reasoning.

Like you dodging the question and editing my quote in your post?

You dodged first and decided to go on by a different track. A track that chooses to involve the poster (me), rather than the issue.

Yes, I edit posts that i respond to. I cut away the irrelevant parts, or parts which would confuse the issue away from the actual point. I do so in an effort to narrow down discussions and be as clear as possible on what I post about.

You dismissed the 'extra credit's' offering in defining/explaining the essential differences between JRPG and WRPG. As I've said before, you're totally entitled to that, but hardly without offering your own view.

Which you haven't done.

I'm anything but stupid. I know what I know. I know what I believe. I know what I suspect. And I know the difference between all those things, and how I must act differently.

[AkiKishi]

Jerrybnsn wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Jerrybnsn wrote...

I'm playing a jrpg right now that's adopted a wrpg artistic presentation; Dragon's Dogma. Anyone heard of it? What I like about it is that it has that original FF IV of just grinding it out in the country side, building up xp and coin.

The demo grew on your after ?

I watched a review video of the game that expounded on it much more than what the demo offered.  I can see that gamers that need strong storylines won't like this game, but it actually has a nostalgia of the original crpg for me.www.youtube.com/watch

I like the combat. Throwing goblins around and pinning things to walls never seems to get old.

I think we see what might happen to DA3 in the design. It's open and you spend a lot of time away from the story so it becomes incidental.

[AkiKishi]

bEVEsthda wrote...

You dodged first and decided to go on by a different track. A track that chooses to involve the poster (me), rather than the issue.

Yes, I edit posts that i respond to. I cut away the irrelevant parts, or parts which would confuse the issue away from the actual point. I do so in an effort to narrow down discussions and be as clear as possible on what I post about.

You dismissed the 'extra credit's' offering in defining/explaining the essential differences between JRPG and WRPG. As I've said before, you're totally entitled to that, but hardly without offering your own view.

Which you haven't done.

I'm anything but stupid. I know what I know. I know what I believe. I know what I suspect. And I know the difference between all those things, and how I must act differently.

I never dodged anything I said I simply chose not to pick appart the contents of the video. I stated that very plainly for all to see.
Until you list your JRPG experience that's my position on the matter.

[bEVEsthda]

Cimeas wrote...
The term could not be applied to DA2, however, because even if it was a turn-based RPG with no choices, it's not from Japan, which is a pretty key part of the name, don't you think?

DA2 is turn based. (it's just mostly hidden from the player)

No. I don't think it has to be made in Japan. I don't think that at all. I totally reject any such interpretation of the label because it would make it irrelevant for gamers. It's only where the genre originated.

In the end, whether DA2 can be considered JRPG or not, depends on what content you ascribe the label to.

You're entitled to have your own feelings about that (as in denying that DA2 is a JRPG). But I don't think you're entitled to change those from a game to game basis.

[bEVEsthda]

BobSmith101 wrote...

bEVEsthda wrote...

You dodged first and decided to go on by a different track. A track that chooses to involve the poster (me), rather than the issue.

Yes, I edit posts that i respond to. I cut away the irrelevant parts, or parts which would confuse the issue away from the actual point. I do so in an effort to narrow down discussions and be as clear as possible on what I post about.

You dismissed the 'extra credit's' offering in defining/explaining the essential differences between JRPG and WRPG. As I've said before, you're totally entitled to that, but hardly without offering your own view.

Which you haven't done.

I'm anything but stupid. I know what I know. I know what I believe. I know what I suspect. And I know the difference between all those things, and how I must act differently.

I never dodged anything I said I simply chose not to pick appart the contents of the video. I stated that very plainly for all to see.
Until you list your JRPG experience that's my position on the matter.

Your "position on the matter"?

Like all these one-line comment posts?

BobSmith101 wrote...
Really not getting how being cinematic changes things are you?
...
Someone using penny arcade as a "source" seen it all now.
...
I think you are just seeing what you want to see.
...
Initially I was going to pick it appart in detail. Then I though why bother. Maybe if it's a slow day at work.
...
Heres a question for you. How many JRPGs have you played?
...
The question was put to you so why would my definition matter? Just list the things you have played to completion.

IMO, you're really not making enough effort to contribute to the discussion.

1: My JRPG experience has nothing at all to do with the issue. So why do you want to go there?  (I'm not really asking that. My suspicion is strong enough. Just showing you how obvious it is.)

2: My JRPG experience would totally depend upon what is considered to be a JRPG, and any reasoning (as suspected) would be entirely circular. I have no reason to go there.

I have already made my points. You have not made yours. You're just throwing rocks from the sidelines.

[Sir JK]

bEVEsthda wrote...
DA2 is turn based. (it's just mostly hidden from the player)

Just to address this for a small bit. DA2 is not turnbased, it's real time limited by cooldown periods couples with a pause. Same as DAO. All of Bioware's previous games (besides mass effect) are turn-based, yes. But not the DA games. Everything is limited by it's cooldowns, measured in seconds. Even autoattack (it has a very short and easily adjusted cooldown). But other than that, combat time is not measured in nor limited by turns.

I'm not debating anything else regarding your posts. I just wished to point this important thing out.

[AkiKishi]

bEVEsthda wrote...

IMO, you're really not making enough effort to contribute to the discussion.

1: My JRPG experience has nothing at all to do with the issue. So why do you want to go there?  (I'm not really asking that. My suspicion is strong enough. Just showing you how obvious it is.)

2: My JRPG experience would totally depend upon what is considered to be a JRPG, and any reasoning (as suspected) would be entirely circular. I have no reason to go there.

I have already made my points. You have not made yours. You're just throwing rocks from the sidelines.

Because until I establish your JRPG experience I'm just throwing out names of games that you may not even be aware of. This is the problem when you try to hide behind an arguement you are not equipped to make yourself.And why I'm not wasting a lot of effort on it right now.

Either you don't have JRPG experience and you are like a kid that just won't eat sprouts even though he's never tried them. Or you do and you are just being difficult.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 25 juillet 2012 - 05:47 .

[Cimeas]

DA2 has cooldowns, but they reset at different times, it is NOT turn based.

Edit: Someone replied first

[Realmzmaster]

Sir JK wrote...

bEVEsthda wrote...
DA2 is turn based. (it's just mostly hidden from the player)

Just to address this for a small bit. DA2 is not turnbased, it's real time limited by cooldown periods couples with a pause. Same as DAO. All of Bioware's previous games (besides mass effect) are turn-based, yes. But not the DA games. Everything is limited by it's cooldowns, measured in seconds. Even autoattack (it has a very short and easily adjusted cooldown). But other than that, combat time is not measured in nor limited by turns.

I'm not debating anything else regarding your posts. I just wished to point this important thing out.

None of Bioware's games are turn based . Starting with BG all have been realtime with pause. The reason the spells and abilities(feats)  did not have cooldowns is because it used the methods in D & D where you had a limited number of spells per level and they had to be memorized. Once a spell was used it was gone until it was re-memorized. Feats were always on.. Bioware has never made a turn based game.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Cimeas wrote...

Also, Sylvius, I'm surprised you even stick to the definition 'RPG' at all.   After all you were the one who said 'I don't consider RPGs 'games' really' or something to that effect, when you continously call them just that by using the term 'RPG in the first place. 

That only makes sense if we assume that all labels are descriptive.

And while labels can be descriptive, they're not necessarily descriptive.  Labels still function as labels even when they are not descriptive.

[Sylvius the Mad]

BobSmith101 wrote...

That would make CoD and 90% of games JRPGS....

DId I claim that was an exhaustive list of the characteristics that make any game a JRPG?

No.

You seem very eager to jump to conclusions.

That JRPGs define the PC for the player is what differentiates JRPGs from western RPGs.  Yes, there are other games in a variety of genres that define the PC for the player, or let the player do it, but I wasn't talking about those games.

JRPGs define the PC for the player.  Western RPGs leave the player to define the PC himself.  That's the fundamental difference between western RPGs and JRPGs.

I don't care where a game is made.  There may well be western RPGs being made in Japan and JRPGs being made in the west, but games that define the PC for the player fail to be western RPGs, and fail to be games I have any interest in playing.

[Fallstar]

Everyone's definition of what makes a jrpg, what makes an arpg, what makes a crpg etc. is going to be different, so no one will ever agree. You can present your criteria and say, "according to my criteria, game X is of type Y" but that's about the limit of it. That's one of the reasons games are normally generically labelled rpgs instead of being more specific.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Which is why I'm pointing to one specific feature that I dislike. I do not want the game to define the PC for me. That's a feature I tend to associate with JRPGs rather than western RPGs, but, more importantly, that's a feature about which I have a strong opinion.

[Sir JK]

Realmzmaster wrote...

None of Bioware's games are turn based . Starting with BG all have been realtime with pause. The reason the spells and abilities(feats)  did not have cooldowns is because it used the methods in D & D where you had a limited number of spells per level and they had to be memorized. Once a spell was used it was gone until it was re-memorized. Feats were always on.. Bioware has never made a turn based game.

Actually, BG, KoTOR and NWN were all turned based. While the game seamlessly transitioned between turns (unless you triggered a autopause at the end of every turn) everything was run through a turn by turn basis. For instance, you could only cast one spell per turn and in melee there were x numbers of attacks per turn.

This is not in place for the DA series.