214 réponses à ce sujet

[Cheech 2.0]

Honestly I think gamers as a whole need to stop having such rigid boundaries regarding genre's. I used to live and die with JRPG's, all I'd play. As time went by I began to realize good stories, memorable characters exist in many different styles. From The Swapper, and Dragon Age, to Sine Mora and Bioshock, all different Styles all memorable to me. Journey Is my favourite game ten years ago I would never of given it a second glance.A good game will find it's fans, regardless of the monikers or labels we put on games or ourselves.

[Lavaeolus]

I still have no idea what an RPG is.

[UniformGreyColor]

I still have no idea what an RPG is.

 

 LOL. It means Role Playing Game and its where you use your imagination to live out a story. You know that, stop being coy .

[Mr.Hmm]

 LOL. It means Role Playing Game and its where you use your imagination to live out a story. You know that, stop being coy .

 

Nah his avatar says that he got no idea

[Eudaemonium]

But then you have games like Dark Souls which defy that trend as being a game entirely on player agency, versus a game like Mass Effect which is more inclined with the agency parameters of a "JRPG", ensemble cast and defined protagonist via the background and class of Shepard being more or less defined fully for you. The added widget of dialogue and branching trees becomes something else entirely, a "hybrid" of sorts that defys genre much like Borderlands can be seen as a dungeon crawler, co-op RPG and shooter all at once.

 

That was kind of my point. I'd actually classify Dark Souls as a WRPG. Ditto for Dragon's Dogma. Like I'd classify games like, say, Septerra Core and Secret of Evermore as JRPGs, despite their being made in the West. I think at this point it's better to think of the W and the J less as markers of geographic origination and more as types that (may have) originated in those places. They're essentially different genres of game, in the sense of genre as appeals to specific emotions and desires on the part of the audience (though genre in itself is an immensely problematic concept anyway, but that's another story). Dark Souls is very clearly *not* a JRPG in the sense of what people think of as a JRPG, neither is Dragon's Dogma. While both do strongly contain aspects of design that draw heavily on conventions of Japanese game design, the same might be said of any game produced within a specific nation that hadn't been explicitly designed mostly for an American market. I daresay an RPG designed in Russia, for example, would be relatively distinct, but might be identifiable in some ways as a WRPG or JRPG-type in the same way that a Russian horror movie could be labelled as a horror movie.

 

Basically, my point is that if terms like JRPG or WRPG should be used as markers of genre (with accompanying genre-specific features and expectations) rather than as designators of geographic origin, especially in the present game market.

[Mistic]

Basically, my point is that if terms like JRPG or WRPG should be used as markers of genre (with accompanying genre-specific features and expectations) rather than as designators of geographic origin, especially in the present game market.

 

I disagree, because then we have to deal with defining which are the "genre-specific features", and problems arise since everyone has their own opinion about it. I prefer the geographical classification because it's objective and avoids the much feared No True Scotsman fallacy.

 

There are other categories that can be used instead to explain a game. Action, turn-based, linear, non-linear, tactical, etc. are labels that are more objective and don't try to presume what a "true" JRPG or WRPG should be.

[Lavaeolus]

 LOL. It means Role Playing Game and its where you use your imagination to live out a story. You know that, stop being coy .

 

I think "RPG" may generally have a more... specific meaning as a term than living out a story, imagination or no. Perhaps it's something to do with stats...

[Mr.Hmm]

I think the answer you are looking for its something like this : An RPG is a game that let's you play a Role(could be a character/animal/bird/monster) in the game and stick with that role for the whole duration of the game.

[Maeshone]

Indeed. But Jrpgs> shooters .

As for appealing to the crowd...hmnn perhaps a sephiroth like character. You know the insane protagonist with mummy issues.

I don't think ol' Sephy qualifies for the "protagonist" title

 

But as for insane antagonists with family issues, we've already had Meredith

[bEVEsthda]

That was kind of my point. I'd actually classify Dark Souls as a WRPG. Ditto for Dragon's Dogma. Like I'd classify games like, say, Septerra Core and Secret of Evermore as JRPGs, despite their being made in the West. I think at this point it's better to think of the W and the J less as markers of geographic origination and more as types that (may have) originated in those places. They're essentially different genres of game, in the sense of genre as appeals to specific emotions and desires on the part of the audience (though genre in itself is an immensely problematic concept anyway, but that's another story). Dark Souls is very clearly *not* a JRPG in the sense of what people think of as a JRPG, neither is Dragon's Dogma. While both do strongly contain aspects of design that draw heavily on conventions of Japanese game design, the same might be said of any game produced within a specific nation that hadn't been explicitly designed mostly for an American market. I daresay an RPG designed in Russia, for example, would be relatively distinct, but might be identifiable in some ways as a WRPG or JRPG-type in the same way that a Russian horror movie could be labelled as a horror movie.

 

Basically, my point is that if terms like JRPG or WRPG should be used as markers of genre (with accompanying genre-specific features and expectations) rather than as designators of geographic origin, especially in the present game market.

 

I used to agree with this. And I used to use JRPG and WRPG as labels in the same way as you are. And if they actually should be used as labels for something tangible, then that's how must be done. The problem is that it doesn't work, because so few understand the labels in that way. And then the labels are useless anyway.

[LinksOcarina]

I used to agree with this. And I used to use JRPG and WRPG as labels in the same way as you are. And if they actually should be used as labels for something tangible, then that's how must be done. The problem is that it doesn't work, because so few understand the labels in that way. And then the labels are useless anyway.

 

 

My jaw just dropped. No. Really.

 

ETA: In all seriousness, this is pretty much why the labels are useless. I believe I can say without reprisal, my point exactly.

[The Hierophant]

If DAI is a success it would be nice if Bio/EA could get Hitoshi Sakimoto to compose, and arrange for a future DA title or new fantasy ip.

[Steelcan]

well they already have over the top combat, ridiculous outfits, and weird hair-dew's

[greywatch]

I used to be only JRPGs (Final Fantasy, Tales of, Baten Kaitos, etc etc), for years and years before I got into Bioware's games. I found that what I had for JRPGs had, as said, better music, but also stronger and more focused stories. I still hold Tales of the Abyss as my favourite video game story of all time. When I also started playing more western-produced games, I found there wasn't as much of a story. Like I would work through the scenarios in say, Mass Effect or Bioshock, but it didn't feel like anything was happening. 

 

Now here we get into arbitrariness, because I then found Assassin's Creed series was incredibly strong in story-telling... But as I type this, I'm realizing that my idea of "stronger story-telling" means more rigid story-telling, in that I tend to prefer it when it can only happen one way. I guess I'm still coming around to choice-based story-telling.

[n7stormrunner]

That was kind of my point. I'd actually classify Dark Souls as a WRPG. Ditto for Dragon's Dogma. Like I'd classify games like, say, Septerra Core and Secret of Evermore as JRPGs, despite their being made in the West. I think at this point it's better to think of the W and the J less as markers of geographic origination and more as types that (may have) originated in those places. They're essentially different genres of game, in the sense of genre as appeals to specific emotions and desires on the part of the audience (though genre in itself is an immensely problematic concept anyway, but that's another story). Dark Souls is very clearly *not* a JRPG in the sense of what people think of as a JRPG, neither is Dragon's Dogma. While both do strongly contain aspects of design that draw heavily on conventions of Japanese game design, the same might be said of any game produced within a specific nation that hadn't been explicitly designed mostly for an American market. I daresay an RPG designed in Russia, for example, would be relatively distinct, but might be identifiable in some ways as a WRPG or JRPG-type in the same way that a Russian horror movie could be labelled as a horror movie.

 

Basically, my point is that if terms like JRPG or WRPG should be used as markers of genre (with accompanying genre-specific features and expectations) rather than as designators of geographic origin, especially in the present game market.

 

 

well your not wrong to classify them like that... cause that is more or less what they are.  more precisely they are action rpgs which is traditionally a western rpg style. though lately rpgs have been blending styles more and more. see ff 13 and dragon age. ff 13   having more actiony rushed turn based gameplay. dragon age with pause and play with tactics for non controlled pcs.  

 

as far as appeling to jrpg fans.  less screw you features more op enemies.  and more mind screws and complex story. bioware has great stories but as a whole they are rather simple . one twist as most and vets see it coming a mile away.

[SoulRebel_1979]

I still have no idea what an RPG is.

Think Tekken, COD, NBA Jam, or Need for Speed

[Cyberstrike nTo]

_{Final Fantasy XIII was the worst games ever made. The story is slow and didn't make a damn bit of sense and the characters are dumb and the world is horrible, and the combat might as well be on automatic and as much as I love Ali Hillis her VO as Lightening was as dull and lifeless.}

[Kinthalis ThornBlade]

How to make DA:I feel more like a JRPG:

 

Turn off the volume.

 

Have a 12 year old recite fanfic written by a Spanish soap opera writer, in SPANISH, which is then translated by google into German, then into Chinese, then into Russian, then back into Spanish. Finally, allow the 12 year old to add his own improvisations from time to time.

 

Also, don't touch the gamepad for 45 minutes at a time, in order to simulate the interminable cut-scenes.

 

Unfortunately, DA:I is already got you covered in terms of the ridiculous over the top combat.

 

There you go.

[n7stormrunner]

_{Final Fantasy XIII was the worst games ever made. The story is slow and didn't make a damn bit of sense and the characters are dumb and the world is horrible, and the combat might as well be on automatic and as much as I love Ali Hillis her VO as Lightening was as dull and lifeless.}

 

 

story wasn't that bad, made sense to me but I have a filter that helps sort out unimportant details most get stuck on. to be far lightning is pretty dull and lifeless as a character, she falls under the boring ripley rip off action girl. I agree the combat was terrible, one should never rush turn based combat .

[JeffZero]

Some of you really ought to try out a game like FFT before lumping the entire subgenre together into an amalgamation of the worst it's offered so baselessly. It's a damn shame the recent state of things has brought us to a point whereby so many think the most insipid, fan service-y stories we see more commonly today are the culmination of the entire library.

 

 

If you haven't seen for yourself the complex sociopolitical state of affairs that is Ivalice, nor the intriguing divergent paths that are Ramza Beoulve and Delita Heiral, and instead you've been led to believe that all Japanese roleplaying games are built on a foundation of low-brow buzzwords and proclamations, then it's no wonder you dismiss the JRPG out-of-hand. I can't blame anyone who's stuck with the Western side for a long time for perceiving things as such in this modern era of crumbling Japanese console developers, but truly some of the best parts of Dragon Age are shared with classics like that game whose image I linked up there.

[Monster A-Go Go]

Seems that to market to the JRPG crowd, they'd have to make the game more like a JRPG. 

 

I really don't want the game to be a JRPG.

 

Not to disparage the sub-genre, of course.  Two of my favorite games/RPGs of all time are Final Fantasy VI and Chrono Trigger, and I was a devoted player all the way through the end of the PS2 era.  But quite frankly, I don't like the direction JRPGs have moved in (or not moved at all, in some cases).  The last JRPG I played was Ni No Kuni.  It was a great game and the first JRPG I've played since trying to like Final Fantasy XIII.  However, despite its charm and strengths, it was still everything that fatigues me about the stereotypical JRPG and left that particular gaming itch so well-scratched that I think I'm still scarred.

 

When you say Dragon Age and JRPG in the same breath, I immediately think of a railroaded story.  You don't make choices.  Your companions grow only the single direction they have been scripted.  Every line of dialogue is set and every surprise has been exhausted by the end of the first playthrough.  Not that this tact is necessarily bad.  Some of the greatest stories in recent memory have been absolutely linear (The Last of Us and Gone Home come to mind), but this is not what I play RPGs for.  As a role-playing game, I actually want to play a role.  I want to give my character her personality and have people react to her actions, not have everything dictated to me.  In this, games like Fallout, Walking Dead, Mass Effect, and Dragon Age are far more successful than Final Fantasy, Breath of Fire, or Persona.  

 

That dichotomy alone shows the divorce that Bioware would have to make with its design ethic in order to court the strictly JRPG sect, and hopefully that never comes to pass.  There is plenty of room for both WRPGs and JRPGs and there are already enough people who enjoy both.  There is no need to strive for monochrome by asking either genre to sacrifice its color.

[JeffZero]

Yeah, I hear ya on that one, Eccentrick. The genre's largely either gone in directions I don't care for or in other cases just not moved nearly enough. Either way, it's been a really long time since anything has impressed me like it used to. BioWare pretty much took over for me, even if it's never exactly delivered anything quite like Chrono Trigger. The ability to suck me into the world is what matters.

[pengwin21]

Bioware is already more JRPGish than most other Western RPGs in ways I consider relevant (emphasis on the party, companion stories, more linear story path). 

[AlanC9]

I disagree, because then we have to deal with defining which are the "genre-specific features", and problems arise since everyone has their own opinion about it. I prefer the geographical classification because it's objective and avoids the much feared No True Scotsman fallacy.
 
There are other categories that can be used instead to explain a game. Action, turn-based, linear, non-linear, tactical, etc. are labels that are more objective and don't try to presume what a "true" JRPG or WRPG should be.

Again, I don't see what use "JRPG" would have if it's just a geographical term. It's like telling me that the lead designer likes strawberry ice cream.