Oh I know what RP meant, I'm just saying what game elements are missing from JRPGs. Using the argument that the player isn't able to directly control the character and make choices, you could say that The Sims or other Tycoon games are RPGs.
One of the most highly regarded RPGs (Final Fantasy 7) do not have any form of decision making yet many people love it. It's obvious that many users on this forum tend to be PC gamers who mostly play the games that are available to them which are, WRPGs.
Dragon Age best RPG of 2009 according to Kotaku
Débuté par
Abriael_CG
, janv. 22 2010 07:09
Retour en haut
#27
Posté 22 janvier 2010 - 10:10
Mordaedil
-
- Members
- 1 626 messages
NWN. It puts you in front of a dungeon master and allows you to create your own character.Abriael_CG wrote...
Oh really? And pray tell, what makes western RPGs more "RP"? As far as I remember None of them actually puts in front of a dungeon master and puts a group of players around you to really play a role as you see fit.
The term "RPG" in videogames just implies a level progression that allows you to acquire skills and what not, and it's the same for western or Japanese RPG (that by the way, besides a few exceptions like DA:O, tend to have much deeper and better stories and characters then their western counterparts).
Gotta love western RPG elitists... they're completely clueless about their own raving, but they do provide some giggles
It's the world greatest RPG. Ever.
#28
Posté 22 janvier 2010 - 10:10
TyroneTasty
-
- Members
- 206 messages
Thund4H0rs3 wrote...
Terwox_ wrote...
Go ask Yahtzee. I'm sure he'll have an enlightening answer for you.
This
http://www.escapistm...d-Ends-With-You
Oh and he certainly does.
#29
Posté 22 janvier 2010 - 10:11
MerinTB
-
- Members
- 4 688 messages
Abriael_CG wrote...
The term "RPG" in videogames just implies a level progression that allows you to acquire skills and what not, and it's the same for western or Japanese RPG (that by the way, besides a few exceptions like DA:O, tend to have much deeper and better stories and characters then their western counterparts).
Fail.
And keep using that whistle emoticon, please. It fits you so well.
Use it again. Everytime you do I smile.
CRPGs need more than level progression - in fact, they don't even need level progression.
Oh no, I used it to!
#30
Posté 22 janvier 2010 - 10:12
Abriael_CG
-
- Members
- 1 789 messages
TyroneTasty wrote...
You're talking about an impossible level of choices being offered to the player. No one expects a video game RPG to replace DnD. The difference between the two is that WRPGs actually try to let you role play which is a whole lot better than watching a bunch of stuff happen as you grind through random battles.
Not all of western RPGs give you moral choices, as much as quite a few Japanese RPGs do. Valkyrie Profile or Star Ocean are two examples, and there are many others. Actually, i will venture to say that in the history of gaming there are quite a few more JRPGs featuring multiple endings than WRPGs.
Sorry, but while I'm sure you might like the style of western rpgs more, they have absolutely no more "RP" content, in average, than their counterparts. This not to mention the fact that stricter choices normally allow for a more fleshed out story and characters, thing that many appreciate. To each his own, but going around telling "Japanese RPGs are not RPGs!" is just shallow elitism, and normally only results in one being laughed at.
Modifié par Abriael_CG, 22 janvier 2010 - 10:12 .
#31
Posté 22 janvier 2010 - 10:12
xCobalt
-
- Members
- 145 messages
So for dragon age, EmoDouche121 are Grey Wardens while Whackeybadguy89 are the Darkspawn, right?Sloth Of Doom wrote...
You play EmoDouche121 who has to save the world from Whackeybadguy89.
It doesn't make much sense to criticize a JRPG's storyline when DA:O isn't that much different.
#32
Posté 22 janvier 2010 - 10:13
Sloth Of Doom
-
- Members
- 4 620 messages
Nobody said that JRPGs aren't good games, I said they aren't ROLE PAYING games. Stop trying to deflect the point and put words in peoples mouths.
Seriously, the whole FF series is just a series of small encounters that you slog through to get told a story. Your characters rarely have any impact on anything, and you never get to decide anything about who your character is.
Seriously, the whole FF series is just a series of small encounters that you slog through to get told a story. Your characters rarely have any impact on anything, and you never get to decide anything about who your character is.
#33
Posté 22 janvier 2010 - 10:14
Abriael_CG
-
- Members
- 1 789 messages
xCobalt wrote...
It doesn't make much sense to criticize a JRPG's storyline when DA:O isn't that much different.
Actually, DA:O takes quite a lot of inspiration from JRPGs, it's easily the most JRPG-friendly western RPG ever made. And that's one of the things that makes it so good.
Sloth Of Doom wrote...
Nobody said that JRPGs aren't good
games, I said they aren't ROLE PAYING games. Stop trying to deflect the
point and put words in peoples mouths.
They are ROLE PLAYING exactly as much as western RPGs, actually.
Oh, yathzee, the moron that loves to slam every game ever created just because he thinks he knows better... so fun.
Modifié par Abriael_CG, 22 janvier 2010 - 10:17 .
#34
Posté 22 janvier 2010 - 10:16
thegreateski
-
- Members
- 4 976 messages
<3TyroneTasty wrote...
Thund4H0rs3 wrote...
Terwox_ wrote...
Go ask Yahtzee. I'm sure he'll have an enlightening answer for you.
This
http://www.escapistm...d-Ends-With-You
Oh and he certainly does.
#35
Posté 22 janvier 2010 - 10:17
Sloth Of Doom
-
- Members
- 4 620 messages
xCobalt wrote...
So for dragon age, EmoDouche121 are Grey Wardens while Whackeybadguy89 are the Darkspawn, right?Sloth Of Doom wrote...
You play EmoDouche121 who has to save the world from Whackeybadguy89.
It doesn't make much sense to criticize a JRPG's storyline when DA:O isn't that much different.
Again, missing the point.
In DA you choose a class, background, appearance and even decide the moraity of your character, then go forth into the world and help or hinder those who you wish, creating your own story while questing to destroy the bad guy.
In a lot of JRPGs you play a specific guy, who acts a specific way , from a specific place, who goes forth into the world to fight set-piece battles and play miniames while someone tells him a story until he can destroy the bad guy
#36
Posté 22 janvier 2010 - 10:18
xCobalt
-
- Members
- 145 messages
In what way exactly? As an RPG fan, I enjoy both types but I didn't really make the connection between DA and JRPGs.Abriael_CG wrote...
Actually, DA:O takes quite a lot of inspiration from JRPGs, it's easily the most JRPG-friendly western RPG ever made. And that's one of the things that makes it so good.
#37
Posté 22 janvier 2010 - 10:23
Abriael_CG
-
- Members
- 1 789 messages
Sloth Of Doom wrote...
In DA you choose a class, background, appearance and even decide the moraity of your character, then go forth into the world and help or hinder those who you wish, creating your own story while questing to destroy the bad guy.
And you know that there are quite a few western RPGs that don't allow that, while there are quite a few japanese ones that do?
Sorry to burst a bubble, but not allowing you to play the "oh my god i'm so bad" guy, doesn't make it less of an RPG.
You can go around telling that FPS games are games that make you jump from platform to platform headbutting bricks for mushrooms, but that wouldn't change what the widely accepted definition of an FPS is in the gaming industry is.
Just as much as the widely accepted definition of an RPG in the gaming industry is a game with an extensive story that lets you progress trough the game alongside with a character that progresses in skills and/or levels.
Your biased personal definition is, I'm afraid, Inconsequential.
xCobalt wrote...
In what way exactly? As an RPG fan, I enjoy both types but I didn't really make the connection between DA and JRPGs.
Mostly in the style and scope of the storytelling and in the presentation of the characters. DA:O is probably the first western RPG that most die-hard JRPG fans I know that wouldn't touch Oblivion or Baldur's with a stick actually enjoyed, because it strikes some common cords on the storytelling part.
Modifié par Abriael_CG, 22 janvier 2010 - 10:25 .
#38
Posté 22 janvier 2010 - 10:27
Sloth Of Doom
-
- Members
- 4 620 messages
..and I never said that western games don't do this, nor did I say that no JRPGS do.
Seriously, if you people can't discuss something without putting words in peoples mouths i don;t know how you expect to have a conversation.
Seriously, if you people can't discuss something without putting words in peoples mouths i don;t know how you expect to have a conversation.
#39
Posté 22 janvier 2010 - 10:27
flem1
-
- Members
- 1 300 messages
Love the commenters there complaining how hard it was to win DA as a mage. Uhh... what?
#40
Guest_Feraele_*
Posté 22 janvier 2010 - 10:32
Guest_Feraele_*
Guest_Feraele_*
-
- Guests
"Your biased personal definition is, I'm afraid, Inconsequential."
Hmm..yes that term could be applied to any and all of us here, right Abby? ^^
Hmm..yes that term could be applied to any and all of us here, right Abby? ^^
Modifié par Feraele, 22 janvier 2010 - 10:33 .
#41
Posté 22 janvier 2010 - 10:36
Abriael_CG
-
- Members
- 1 789 messages
Feraele wrote...
Hmm..yes that term could be applied to any and all of us here, right Abby? ^^
Not really. The widely accepted definition of the genre is quite clear, and personally I love both sub-genres since Final Fantasy I on the NES and Pool of Radiance.
Coming here and saying those games shouldn't be accepted in the holy heaven of RPGs because I SAY SO isn't exactly of any consequence to the matter at hand. It's just gratuitous bashing.
Modifié par Abriael_CG, 22 janvier 2010 - 10:37 .
#42
Posté 22 janvier 2010 - 11:20
MerinTB
-
- Members
- 4 688 messages
The definition of role-playing games is pretty fluid.
I was (and kind of fell off after a bit) doing an overblown history of the development of CRPGs over the years. But the long and the short of it for those who are tossing around all this crap about JRPGs or "Western" RPGS (are there any Western RPGS other than the Wild Arms series which, coincidentally, is a JRPG?) is that most of both are actually RPGs, as are many games that are not categorized as RPGs, and some that are categorized as RPGs maybe shouldn't be.
The USA created the CRPG, back with Rogue and DnD and Dungeon and the precursor to Ultima (name escapsess me, begins with an A).
And Japan, like they did with capitalism and tvs and stereos and cars and animation, took what America invented and "improved" on it (depends on your opinion, mostly, but they sure became equals at least) -
JRPGs branched from about the time of Ultima 3 - and you can STILL see the combat style of Phantasie / Ultima in most JRPGs, especially Final Fantasy.
The CRPGs out of America (and Europe), however, continued to evolve more along the SSI route than the Origins route, following the Gold Box games into Baldur's Gate -
and there you get the major distinction in GAMEPLAY.
The JRPG's still do the almost completely turn-based, with the flashing numbers overhead, the long lists of items. What the JRPG's brought to CRPGs was STORY, lots of story with long cut scenes. But the combat is only better aninmated than it started.
The CRPG's of the west developed along the CHOICE and CONSEQUENCES model, birthed from Black Isle and Bioware. The combat systems continued to stray more and more into real-time and twitch gaming, though some (like DAO) try to hold true to some semblance of tactical strategy via a pseudo turn-based system.
Outside of the two big differences (JRPGs combat still in the old Ultima style but highly stylized and really long story cut scenes for deep, involving stories VS. "western" CRPGs going more real-time with combat and focusing on the choices a player can make and the consequences those choices have) both "styles" are more or less CRPGs and all other aspects waiver back and forth between different games.
To be a role-playing game, boiling it down as much as I can, simply requires -
the player takes on the role of a character in the game, a character who the player interacts with the environment as that character would, through a story in which the character and the game world changes because of the character's actions.
Creating your own character is often an aspect, but no necessary. Same with having a party, having stats, items, dialog choices, game choices that decide how the game ends, etc.
Like how people continue to misuse irony to mean coincidence or hypocrisy, many people (even media outlets and game reviewers) misuse "RPG" to mean games where you can "level up" or create your own characters or gain different loot that you can swap around or story-based with decisions. Those are common aspects of an RPG, but like a tail is a common aspect of a dog having a tail doesn't make an animal a dog, and there are dogs born without tails but they are still dogs.
I was (and kind of fell off after a bit) doing an overblown history of the development of CRPGs over the years. But the long and the short of it for those who are tossing around all this crap about JRPGs or "Western" RPGS (are there any Western RPGS other than the Wild Arms series which, coincidentally, is a JRPG?) is that most of both are actually RPGs, as are many games that are not categorized as RPGs, and some that are categorized as RPGs maybe shouldn't be.
The USA created the CRPG, back with Rogue and DnD and Dungeon and the precursor to Ultima (name escapsess me, begins with an A).
And Japan, like they did with capitalism and tvs and stereos and cars and animation, took what America invented and "improved" on it (depends on your opinion, mostly, but they sure became equals at least) -
JRPGs branched from about the time of Ultima 3 - and you can STILL see the combat style of Phantasie / Ultima in most JRPGs, especially Final Fantasy.
The CRPGs out of America (and Europe), however, continued to evolve more along the SSI route than the Origins route, following the Gold Box games into Baldur's Gate -
and there you get the major distinction in GAMEPLAY.
The JRPG's still do the almost completely turn-based, with the flashing numbers overhead, the long lists of items. What the JRPG's brought to CRPGs was STORY, lots of story with long cut scenes. But the combat is only better aninmated than it started.
The CRPG's of the west developed along the CHOICE and CONSEQUENCES model, birthed from Black Isle and Bioware. The combat systems continued to stray more and more into real-time and twitch gaming, though some (like DAO) try to hold true to some semblance of tactical strategy via a pseudo turn-based system.
Outside of the two big differences (JRPGs combat still in the old Ultima style but highly stylized and really long story cut scenes for deep, involving stories VS. "western" CRPGs going more real-time with combat and focusing on the choices a player can make and the consequences those choices have) both "styles" are more or less CRPGs and all other aspects waiver back and forth between different games.
To be a role-playing game, boiling it down as much as I can, simply requires -
the player takes on the role of a character in the game, a character who the player interacts with the environment as that character would, through a story in which the character and the game world changes because of the character's actions.
Creating your own character is often an aspect, but no necessary. Same with having a party, having stats, items, dialog choices, game choices that decide how the game ends, etc.
Like how people continue to misuse irony to mean coincidence or hypocrisy, many people (even media outlets and game reviewers) misuse "RPG" to mean games where you can "level up" or create your own characters or gain different loot that you can swap around or story-based with decisions. Those are common aspects of an RPG, but like a tail is a common aspect of a dog having a tail doesn't make an animal a dog, and there are dogs born without tails but they are still dogs.
Modifié par MerinTB, 22 janvier 2010 - 11:22 .
#44
Posté 23 janvier 2010 - 01:37
thegreateski
-
- Members
- 4 976 messages
I don't understand how anyone could find this game difficult . . .
#45
Posté 23 janvier 2010 - 08:19
Terwox_
-
- Members
- 506 messages
Abriael_CG wrote...
Oh, yathzee, the moron that loves to slam every game ever created just because he thinks he knows better... so fun.
Actually that's not all he does. But then again, you need to actually pay attention to what he's saying to figure that one out. And quite frankly, he's one off the more accurate and least influenced by big scary developer/publishers game critics in existance. And although his method of getting his points across are abit crude, they are no less valid. And "slamming" games for flaws is part off the job description off a game critic last time I checked.
#46
Posté 23 janvier 2010 - 08:55
OH-UP-THIS!
-
- Members
- 2 399 messages
I found Yahtzees' interpretation of "Crysis" quite hilarious in fact.
#47
Posté 23 janvier 2010 - 09:03
RetrOldSchool
-
- Members
- 280 messages
Sloth Of Doom wrote...
thegreateski wrote...
Ok, I'll say it.xCobalt wrote...
By lacking "RP", what are these games missing?
That's a dumb question.
It is a pretty dumb question.
RPG= Role Playing Game, so RP= Role Playing?
Like I said, most JRPGs give you no choice of character at all. You play EmoDouche121 who has to save the world from Whackeybadguy89.
If you aren't defining the role, and have no options in the way that things are done it isn't really a role playing game, it is a battle simulator with specific characters.
I wouldnt say that JRPG's doesnt offer any options, for instance Persona 4 had 3 different endings depending on choices and in most games you have small choices to make, however, in general it's never as big choices as in WRPG's like BG, DA:O, KOTOR; Fallout etc.
But just breaking down RPG literally would make Saints Row 2 an RPG, you create your character and you have a lot of choices. Even FIFA 10 in "Be a pro" mode would be an RPG in that sense.
IMO I think JRPG's would benefit greatly from more freedom of choice, but I don't think you could deem them non-RPG's simply because of the literal meaning of RPG.
Also, if you only define it by a game where you play a role, it's really anybodys game, be it Assassins Creed, God of War or any other game with a story mode, you are given a role to play, sometimes you can make choices sometimes you cant. I think some games that are defined as action RPG's IMO arent even RPG's. Fable 1&2 are 2 examples. You can't even speak to people, you only do WoW-type emotes, but a lot of people do consider Fable 1&2 great RPG's.
I would define an RPG out of elements instead, though I dont think an RPG must have all of them. Some of the elements I like to see in an RPG are:
-A great story
-Character development
-Leveling
-Conversations and interactions
-Companions
-Friendly areas (towns, settlements etc)
-Equipment
-Customization
-Choices
-Character creation
FOr example Fable 2 had most of the above, but IMO most of it were done in such a shallow way I dont consider the game an RPG, more a hack-n-slash/sandbox game with RPG elements...
Now, back to topic: I can come to think of at least 3 WRPG's out 2009:
Risen
Divinity 2
Borderlands (I havent played it, and im not sure I would consider it an RPG, but it's labeled as action/FPS/RPG hybrid)
Plus some JRPG's, Magna Carta2, Star Ocean 4 and some more.
So RPG of 2009 is still a good award.
#48
Posté 23 janvier 2010 - 09:20
7evendays
-
- Members
- 38 messages
I don't think Sloth of Doom was debating the definition I think the point was that a lack of character choices makes these games sort of boring. Which I agree with. That's what I gathered from Sloth of Doom's posts, but I don't want to put words in anyone's mouth. 
#49
Posté 23 janvier 2010 - 09:41
Terwox_
-
- Members
- 506 messages
A small note on Borderlands. Its repetitive as hell. Its like playing a singleplayer MMO. Then again its buildt for up to 4 player coop. So playing it solo is abit off a moot and dull point.
#50
Posté 23 janvier 2010 - 09:45
Sloth Of Doom
-
- Members
- 4 620 messages
7evendays wrote...
I don't think Sloth of Doom was debating the definition I think the point was that a lack of character choices makes these games sort of boring. Which I agree with. That's what I gathered from Sloth of Doom's posts, but I don't want to put words in anyone's mouth.
Well, at least someone understood what I was saying instead of leaping to an over dramatic and unwarranted defense of a gaming genre. Believe me, if I was tring to be insulting you would know it. :innocent:
