The bursting of the jRPG bubble: the decline of Square Enix and eternal struggle.

[StriderTuna]

The eternal struggle being the contention between wRPG players and jRPG players.


For a while there's been a slight decline in 'quality' of mainstream jRPGs, with folks calling them movies and so forth, but with how FFXIII was received by the media, it's clear that as the game Catherine quotes, "Love is Over". The ironic thing is that SE actually took pages out of Tales and SMT's notebooks as things like "Directly controlling one character only" and "Leader dying results in a game over" are rather common in such series. The shift in trend bodes badly for the general state of jRPGs as most follow FF's example. And in the eyes of the gamers, jRPGs have hit quite a low, to the point where it's fashionable to bash them.

And if FF's fall from grace, it's up to various series that would have troubles assuming the mantle of Flagship RPG series in the west as in japan, Dragon Quest is still going pretty strong. But in the west, DQ seems to pale in the eyes of many compared to the far more progressive FF. Tri-Ace and Atlus are far too niche to catch the eyes of many and Tales Studio is hampered by Namco's RPG incompetence. Not even the father of FF, Sakaguchi could easily take up the flag as Last Story hasn't caught on like some have hoped.

Western RPGs in contrast are becoming more fashionable despite the flaws apparent in them. I believe it's due to them hitting consoles and having rather high production values while avoiding the infamous excesses of modern jRPGs. Even in spite of overhyped games like Dragon Age 2 or Fable 3, opinion appears rather high still.

This in turn has caused the old rivalry to flare up as some wRPG fans have gotten haughty and sneer down upon jRPGs in general, even as the jRPG fans attempt to explain that not all of them have the now infamous excesses that Final Fantasy and Xenosaga were known for.

Do note that I haven't gotten into MMORPGs as they're a particularly separate case with the biggest names being mainly Blizzard or in a distant second, Nexton, which localizes/publishes various Korean games. PSO was rather ahead of its time, which leads me to wonder how well Sega's efforts with PSO2 will go in the face of fierce competition such as WoW, FFXIV/XI as well as the biggest names in kMMORPGs.

I am curious as to how wRPGers here see things as a different perspective is always welcome.

[Sord]

Honestly, for every wRPG, I seem to see or hear about 4-5 different jRPGs. That may be flooding of the market right there, or that might just be me having a skewed perception. I don't know.

One of the biggest differences though between wRPG and jRPG though, is the amount of action in wRPG games, and the fact they have become more integrated with other game styles. While many jRPGs continue to trudge in the same style for years now (turn based level grind, with a few spins on the combat system.) Take games like Bioshock, Fallout 3, Oblivion (soon Skyrim,) the Fable series, Mass Effect, Borderlands, etc. They were all fairly big hits (though Fable has admittedly been shooting downhill since 2 if you ask me due to lack of difficulty and extremely short playtime.) None of them are like the RPGs of old (and by old, I mean like super nintendo and sega genesis or further back.) Every one of them is a major title and part of a franchise now, and none of them are using turn based combat. You are playing the single role of a character, that engages in actions that are popular in the midwest (shooting or hack n slash, and definitely not turn based.) I think the majority of the west simply does not care for turn based combat, something that's as old as pen and paper gaming. It feels archaic and is no longer very engaging. There's also a much greater immersion when you're controlling your one guy, who can become an extension of yourself. You cannot do this in jRPGs, characters are locked into their personalities and you have to deal with several of them. The only way you are going to get immersion in jRPG is if you like playing 10,000 rounds of the same strategy game (the numerous "fights") and the story actually interests you. Neither of those are well received in the west.

However, some RPGs have come out of the woodwork of Japan that are also not strictly adhering to typical turn based combat with one or two spins thrown in. The Tales series for one. I've met people who didn't really care for jRPGs, but would play these (especially since the release of Symphonia for GC) simply because it was real time combat and it's a great multi-player co-op romp. PSO definitely felt ahead of it's time, because it completely threw the cooldown timer and turn based combat out the window and it was about single character control and actual action, and it was online. While Monster Hunter is still relatively niche, it still at least has a pretty nice following behind it, more so than most other jRPGs over here.

Story wise, jRPGs try and be too complex half the time, and it usually seems like it turns around and bites them in the ass. One of their biggest problems seems to be the constant rehash of character tropes. Now that every jRPG is trying to throw in 20 damn characters or something (perhaps to appear epic or something,) character writing is stretched thin (or maybe they really are just terrible writers now.) Even major franchises like FFXIII suffer from this, heavily. Within the first few hours of gameplay, every single character can be immediately pegged as an overused archetype. That's not to say wRPGs don't use them, but since we usually play the role of a silent character we don't deal with it from the main guy, and anyone we bump into quest wise might be there for a little bit, but not really long enough to even care they are a cliched character.

One could argue that jRPGs aren't even RPGs. What "role" are you even playing? All characters are locked into their personalities and you're moving through a dozen or more of them. That's not roleplaying, that's just strategy gaming. The Legend of Zelda is more true to the term RPG than most jRPGs actually are.

Then there's voice acting, it's very well respected in Japan, not so much over here. Most localized jRPGs have shit for voice acting, and whenever the whole game starts feeling like a movie, well, who wants to listen to 40-100 hours of shitty voices that grate on the ears? While this is the fault of the localization team, and not really of gameplay development, when you're throwing long cut-scenes in every hour or two and speaking nearly every bit of text, it gets old, fast. wRPGs don't suffer as heavily from this (though some do,) because they were made by the west, for the west. They feature prominent voice actors in western gameing, sometimes even actors from movies or TV shows. It's far more enjoyable, and talking is not as over used because we're playing a silent character half the time. On top of this, the current trend is to give a player several different choices so they can play the way they want. Not lock them into a long story they are probably going to hate peppered with repetitive combat that can take 5 minutes to an hour. Shoot/slash an enemy a few times, he's downed, you move on. Turn based combat, have fun running around in a dungeon, getting hit with random encounters every 10 seconds that initiate an opening sequence, a long period of gameplay time (in comparison, a few seconds to several minutes is a big jump when added up,) and then a winning sequence (unless you lost of course.) Then you go back to your character, take 20-50 steps, BOOM. DO IT AGAIN. Suddenly thirty minutes to an hour later you've maybe covered a small stretch of land. Once again, this gets old, fast. And for all the pretty graphics and over-the-top epicness they throw in, every move loses it's luster when you've casted it on enemies a million freaking times.

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with liking the gameplay of jRPGs, to be fair, some have pretty deep and intricate battle systems that can really do a lot with some micromanaging. However, that is not a popular trend over here. Especially with more casual gamers (which, btw, have pretty much exploded into the market,) that only play an hour or two at any given time. A lot of people don't want to invest time in getting through a learning curve. They just want to sit back and relax and play a game whose gameplay comes intuitively to them.


Then there's marketing. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see western games get better marketing in the west than games from the east do. Sometimes there are some trend breaking jRPGs that really should have been better marketed over here and could have succeeded with it. That, however, is not the only issue, and anyone that thinks so is seriously fooling themselves.

I've very interested to see how well the new PSP FF (Type-Zero) will do. It's a major J franchise title breaking away from the jRPG trend in gameplay mechanics (and it's not Crystal Chronicles, ouph.)

That's my take on it at least.

Wish I could have a counter for every person that isn't going to read this 'cause of length, lol.

[NoiseHERO]

cut

I agree with your first two paragraphs...

Then I scrolled down...

and saw like 8 more or something and got discouraged from reading...

For me... J-RPG gaming died after tales of symphonia...

Mostly because I couldn't afford RPG games afterwards, then I just got into PSU and stopped playing other videogames outside of handhelds altogether...

[Mantiskilla]

Just my opinion but I tend to think that part of the jRPG genre has declined due to the bulk of the age bracket who grew up with it are well getting older. jRPG tend to be time consuming and thats a good thing; however, with a lot of the audience who fueled the rise of the genre being older (college, out of college, married, career, etc.) I think a big chunk of those people who used to purchase the games no longer do, or if they do it's not an immediate, or important purchase. With some younger audiences out there today there are very good wRPGs to chose from so that can also play into the decline of it over here. Years ago obviously you either played a jRPG or not much else.

[Powder Keg]

I think the main reason it's in a decline is because...

Japan: Everyone has PS3, make JRPGs for PS3. We won't make JRPGs for 360 because no one here has that.

US: No one has PS3, oops JRPG sales suck.

Then companies like Namco don't translate their better titles and put a great game like Tales of the Abyss on......the 3DS?? It's like they're looking for excuses to say the market here sucks.


And Square-Enix has been declining in quality since..........they became Square-Enix. The only right thing they've done are their remakes. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed FFXIII but I can totally understand why people would hate it.

[BIG OLAF]

I'm not really a fan of jRPGs. Since I don't like anime, and most jRPGs are made in an "anime" style, they really just don't appeal to me. The only exception I've ever made to the rule was the Phantasy Star series, obviously.

I much prefer wRPG series, like TES, Fallout, Mass Effect, etc.

[StriderTuna]

Wow... it'll take me time to answer all the points, but I'll do that. Thanks for the answers. I'll edit this post with them when I get around to it.

To Siyamak: I'lll need a whole other post to answer you.

To Michaeru: There's more good stuff after ToS, though the GC was terrible for RPGs and I don't recall RPG games being particularly more expensive than other types. (Then again I rarely brought games new) My problem was that on the PS2 there were so many games, some of the fell through my cracks.

To Mantiskilla: Good point, but back in the old days, most wRPGs were PC only and most jRPGs were console only, and the conflict was part of the PC vs Console battle as PC fans called console gamers immature, and console gamers calling PC gamers elitist (Not just anyone could have a prime gaming PC), narrow minded (PCs were mainly known for wRPGs and FPS). I think part of it is how companies pad the hours these days (cinemas, unfairly difficult mini-games) but I could take up a post with my commentary on quality>quantity. Also I think jRPGs are receding back to the niche it came from (before FF7) and likewise the people that play them still are those that played them in the past.

To Powder Keg: That's rather true, though in japan the microsoft systems were something of a joke before ToV, with the PS3 being the big system. In the west, most jrpgers either have a PS3 or not, hardly an 360 (mainly with wRPGers and FPS players). It's only recently that the PS3 have been picking up in sales.

As far as Namco, there's been many things.

The 2d games: Sony's anti-2d policy and Namco's relucance to pressforward (like aksys games)

ToV PS3: the 360 version didn't "sell well enough" (they expected FF level sales on a game w/ hardly any advertising and on a system not known for jrpgs; i.e. typical namco)

TotA 3DS was the result of the producer wanting to make a portable high end tales game and considered the 3DS perfect for it. The Vita at this point is basically conceptual and not produced yet), it might actually sell systems. It's enough to make me want it.

To BIG OLAF: True, they're made with japanese asthetics foremost with few exceptions. The Valkyire Profile series is an example, mainly the first game as the latter two games had a bit of decay (some animeish elements popped up, but rather minor). I consider the style for say Dragon Age well done, not so much WoW (very comic bookish in how exaggerated things are). But wRPG design has always been very traditional

But on a separate note, I hope you're not a fan of the "Angry bald man" design school of western games made popular as of late (It's like they can't program hair or be bothered to)

[Mantiskilla]

Nah actually you probably should say most wRPGs back in the day were just getting onto PCs during the Nintendo era (SVGA graphically anyway). Really at the end of the day it was still far more popular with pencil and paper. The King's Quests, Quest for Glory's, and D&Ds of the world were still a pretty new concept, but at the same time jRPGs really didn't explode until the late NES, SNES/Genesis era over here and by then some wRPGs already were on consoles like Dungeons and Dragons Warriors of the Eternal Sun on Genesis. Good summary though on responses. Thanks for your input

[NoiseHERO]

To Michaeru: There's more good stuff after ToS, though the GC was terrible for RPGs and I don't recall RPG games being particularly more expensive than other types. (Then again I rarely brought games new) My problem was that on the PS2 there were so many games, some of the fell through my cracks.

Oh I know, I was just too broke in general. My old lady stop givin' up the christmas money cause of my grades nam sayin'?

And then I felt like I didn't have a reason to play rpg's in general anymore after PSU. :S So by the time like 20 tales of/persona/star ocean/whatevers popular now games came out, I was no longer interested, some reasons also because of what that other dude said: "growing up."

[StriderTuna]

Nah actually you probably should say most wRPGs back in the day were just getting onto PCs during the Nintendo era (SVGA graphically anyway). Really at the end of the day it was still far more popular with pencil and paper. The King's Quests, Quest for Glory's, and D&Ds of the world were still a pretty new concept, but at the same time jRPGs really didn't explode until the late NES, SNES/Genesis era over here and by then some wRPGs already were on consoles like Dungeons and Dragons Warriors of the Eternal Sun on Genesis. Good summary though on responses. Thanks for your input

Yeah I do remember how wRPGs were super niche compared to the few jrpgs we got back then. And the Snes era was the beginning of the golden era of RPGs. In a way "The Spirits within" was a factor in the end of such widespread creativity.


Oh I know, I was just too broke in general. My old lady stop givin' up the christmas money cause of my grades nam sayin'?

And then I felt like I didn't have a reason to play rpg's in general anymore after PSU. :S So by the time like 20 tales of/persona/star ocean/whatevers popular now games came out, I was no longer interested, some reasons also because of what that other dude said: "growing up."

Well... bad grades were never a problem, though I didn't get much in the way of money until I hit 18 where I had jobs easily supplying my buying habits. Well... some in my family believe "Just be cause you grow old doesn't mean you have to grow up (completely).

[NoiseHERO]

Yeah I do remember how wRPGs were super niche compared to the few jrpgs we got back then. And the Snes era was the beginning of the golden era of RPGs. In a way "The Spirits within" was a factor in the end of such widespread creativity.



Well... bad grades were never a problem, though I didn't get much in the way of money until I hit 18 where I had jobs easily supplying my buying habits. Well... some in my family believe "Just be cause you grow old doesn't mean you have to grow up (completely).

I guess the growing up part is more related to my patience...

And being drown in tropes my whole life, especially ones popular in Japanese culture.

It kind of makes you sick like eating the same thing over and over but for me it attacks my attention span first and I just don't feel obligated to get into a game. Or even if I do, all I do is beat it and drop it.

[StriderTuna]

I guess the growing up part is more related to my patience...

And being drown in tropes my whole life, especially ones popular in Japanese culture.

It kind of makes you sick like eating the same thing over and over but for me it attacks my attention span first and I just don't feel obligated to get into a game. Or even if I do, all I do is beat it and drop it.

I never played much generic stuff and I'm someone who will replay a game after I beat it,even if it's months later.

Tales games may not have the best pilots, but the characters are rather high quality.

[Sord]

I never played much generic stuff and I'm someone who will replay a game after I beat it,even if it's months later.

Tales games may not have the best pilots, but the characters are rather high quality.

I'll admit that I've only played Symphonia and Vesperia, but to me it felt like some of the character personalities from Symphonia were directly cookie-cuttered into Vesperia. The main difference was the roles of the characters in story, but as per actual personality traits

quiet innocent girl that wants no harm (collette/estelle)
spunky girl that's outworldly aggressive at times (Raine/Rita,)
typical aloof male (think it was Regal/Yuri.)
Etc.

Yuri especially is a huge trope. Typical aloof male that mostly cares for himself and a few close others that somehow manages to get dragged into crap, find out he actually has an important past. So I have to disagree at least on those games concerning characters. The whole dual rivalship/friendship between Yuri and Flynn also felt very very typical, especially of anime. If I had to pick a story and set of character though, I'd say I like Vesperia more, especially once things get heavy with the guild city.

[StriderTuna]

I'll admit that I've only played Symphonia and Vesperia, but to me it felt like some of the character personalities from Symphonia were directly cookie-cuttered into Vesperia. The main difference was the roles of the characters in story, but as per actual personality traits

quiet innocent girl that wants no harm (collette/estelle)
spunky girl that's outworldly aggressive at times (Raine/Rita,)
typical aloof male (think it was Regal/Yuri.)
Etc.

Yuri especially is a huge trope. Typical aloof male that mostly cares for himself and a few close others that somehow manages to get dragged into crap, find out he actually has an important past. So I have to disagree at least on those games concerning characters. The whole dual rivalship/friendship between Yuri and Flynn also felt very very typical, especially of anime. If I had to pick a story and set of character though, I'd say I like Vesperia more, especially once things get heavy with the guild city.

There are some common archetypes but they're generally executed differently. I wouldn't say Yuri and Regal are of the same archetype as Regal seems much more stoic than Yuri. And Raine came to me as more reserved barring ruins or Lloyd being stupid.

You should try playing some of the other Tales like Abyss as it's more of an outstanding example of characters. Though in the tales series, Yuri and Flynn's type of rivalry is a change from the normal (epic life and death affairs) Even an old game like Destiny has some surprising characterizations (as well as the original "rival" character, Leon.)

[Zettaizero]

Just my opinion but I tend to think that part of the jRPG genre has declined due to the bulk of the age bracket who grew up with it are well getting older. jRPG tend to be time consuming and thats a good thing; however, with a lot of the audience who fueled the rise of the genre being older (college, out of college, married, career, etc.) I think a big chunk of those people who used to purchase the games no longer do, or if they do it's not an immediate, or important purchase. With some younger audiences out there today there are very good wRPGs to chose from so that can also play into the decline of it over here. Years ago obviously you either played a jRPG or not much else.

I'd have to agree with Mantiskilla on the change of audience, but it seems that the older we get the more all genres of videogames decline in general or they're just not as appealing as it used to be. Its hard being original these days, it could be that or how the current audience prefers a game to be which will make it sell. Just an opinion thrown out there though.

[StriderTuna]

Honestly, for every wRPG, I seem to see or hear about 4-5 different jRPGs. That may be flooding of the market right there, or that might just be me having a skewed perception. I don't know.

One of the biggest differences though between wRPG and jRPG though, is the amount of action in wRPG games, and the fact they have become more integrated with other game styles. While many jRPGs continue to trudge in the same style for years now (turn based level grind, with a few spins on the combat system.) Take games like Bioshock, Fallout 3, Oblivion (soon Skyrim,) the Fable series, Mass Effect, Borderlands, etc. They were all fairly big hits (though Fable has admittedly been shooting downhill since 2 if you ask me due to lack of difficulty and extremely short playtime.) None of them are like the RPGs of old (and by old, I mean like super nintendo and sega genesis or further back.) Every one of them is a major title and part of a franchise now, and none of them are using turn based combat. You are playing the single role of a character, that engages in actions that are popular in the midwest (shooting or hack n slash, and definitely not turn based.) I think the majority of the west simply does not care for turn based combat, something that's as old as pen and paper gaming. It feels archaic and is no longer very engaging. There's also a much greater immersion when you're controlling your one guy, who can become an extension of yourself. You cannot do this in jRPGs, characters are locked into their personalities and you have to deal with several of them. The only way you are going to get immersion in jRPG is if you like playing 10,000 rounds of the same strategy game (the numerous "fights") and the story actually interests you. Neither of those are well received in the west.

However, some RPGs have come out of the woodwork of Japan that are also not strictly adhering to typical turn based combat with one or two spins thrown in. The Tales series for one. I've met people who didn't really care for jRPGs, but would play these (especially since the release of Symphonia for GC) simply because it was real time combat and it's a great multi-player co-op romp. PSO definitely felt ahead of it's time, because it completely threw the cooldown timer and turn based combat out the window and it was about single character control and actual action, and it was online. While Monster Hunter is still relatively niche, it still at least has a pretty nice following behind it, more so than most other jRPGs over here.

Story wise, jRPGs try and be too complex half the time, and it usually seems like it turns around and bites them in the ass. One of their biggest problems seems to be the constant rehash of character tropes. Now that every jRPG is trying to throw in 20 damn characters or something (perhaps to appear epic or something,) character writing is stretched thin (or maybe they really are just terrible writers now.) Even major franchises like FFXIII suffer from this, heavily. Within the first few hours of gameplay, every single character can be immediately pegged as an overused archetype. That's not to say wRPGs don't use them, but since we usually play the role of a silent character we don't deal with it from the main guy, and anyone we bump into quest wise might be there for a little bit, but not really long enough to even care they are a cliched character.

One could argue that jRPGs aren't even RPGs. What "role" are you even playing? All characters are locked into their personalities and you're moving through a dozen or more of them. That's not roleplaying, that's just strategy gaming. The Legend of Zelda is more true to the term RPG than most jRPGs actually are.

Then there's voice acting, it's very well respected in Japan, not so much over here. Most localized jRPGs have shit for voice acting, and whenever the whole game starts feeling like a movie, well, who wants to listen to 40-100 hours of shitty voices that grate on the ears? While this is the fault of the localization team, and not really of gameplay development, when you're throwing long cut-scenes in every hour or two and speaking nearly every bit of text, it gets old, fast. wRPGs don't suffer as heavily from this (though some do,) because they were made by the west, for the west. They feature prominent voice actors in western gameing, sometimes even actors from movies or TV shows. It's far more enjoyable, and talking is not as over used because we're playing a silent character half the time. On top of this, the current trend is to give a player several different choices so they can play the way they want. Not lock them into a long story they are probably going to hate peppered with repetitive combat that can take 5 minutes to an hour. Shoot/slash an enemy a few times, he's downed, you move on. Turn based combat, have fun running around in a dungeon, getting hit with random encounters every 10 seconds that initiate an opening sequence, a long period of gameplay time (in comparison, a few seconds to several minutes is a big jump when added up,) and then a winning sequence (unless you lost of course.) Then you go back to your character, take 20-50 steps, BOOM. DO IT AGAIN. Suddenly thirty minutes to an hour later you've maybe covered a small stretch of land. Once again, this gets old, fast. And for all the pretty graphics and over-the-top epicness they throw in, every move loses it's luster when you've casted it on enemies a million freaking times.

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with liking the gameplay of jRPGs, to be fair, some have pretty deep and intricate battle systems that can really do a lot with some micromanaging. However, that is not a popular trend over here. Especially with more casual gamers (which, btw, have pretty much exploded into the market,) that only play an hour or two at any given time. A lot of people don't want to invest time in getting through a learning curve. They just want to sit back and relax and play a game whose gameplay comes intuitively to them.


Then there's marketing. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see western games get better marketing in the west than games from the east do. Sometimes there are some trend breaking jRPGs that really should have been better marketed over here and could have succeeded with it. That, however, is not the only issue, and anyone that thinks so is seriously fooling themselves.

I've very interested to see how well the new PSP FF (Type-Zero) will do. It's a major J franchise title breaking away from the jRPG trend in gameplay mechanics (and it's not Crystal Chronicles, ouph.)

That's my take on it at least.

Wish I could have a counter for every person that isn't going to read this 'cause of length, lol.

Let me try to answer this in an efficient fashion.

Japan has a different take on roleplaying than the west, putting you in the shoes of the lead and seeing all his struggles inside and out. And most modern wRPGs have the illusion of freedom as in the end you only have 2-3 paths and you still kill the final boss. A shocking experiment in non-linearity is the Saga series, where you're free to chart whatever course you want, and it might make you think "What would this character focus on". For example, you might figure the nomad girl would value the plains than politics or you might figure she might want to get involved with them. Sadly I'm not sure if most recieves them well as the games only gives you hints on where to go (The western media cries "No story" because it's not spoonfed)

But the cutscene issue is what I mentioned as the infamous excesses of modern RPGs. Also jRPGs having sometimes lacking VA is due to the US branch being cheap. Most games in general involve animation VA studios, such as Bang ZOOM. On the other hand, target fans of modern wRPGs drool at the mention of certain actors being involved though it's seen as a risky action (Such actors are usually 2-3x as expensive as an animation VA.)

Also some of hte games you mentioned aren't really RPGs, Bioshock is more an typical upgrade-ladden action game but with a bit more effort on the plot.

Repetive battles? That's a thing easily tossed at wRPGs. Also some things like Tales aim to make the battles fun (and possibly making that the best part of the game); Tri-Ace is similar in that regard with the story playing second fiddle to the item creation systems and battles.

But the way I'm starting to see wRPGs these days as they're sacrificing elements of a RPG just to appeal to people. Strip enough rpg elements from a and it stops being a RPG and becomes something else, possibly with a nice story.

I'm not sure how well "Type-0" will do seeing how people didn't like FFXIII's departure from convention.

Though these days writing quality has generally decreased from the Snes era. FFVI had 13 playable characters, each of them standing out on their own. Archetypes and cliches are generally used because they work, and it's never a good idea to view the character solely by archetype as it's a vague view and causes a warped view, particularly of the originators of the archetype. Such are prone to being called "generic" by people following that view. What happened with FFXIII might have been a result of flawed writing and flawed perception. People are prone to assuming something and sticking with it despite any evident refuting it.

Though I must say your PoV is interesting as it's likely what many long time wRPGers think of the other side.

[StriderTuna]

I'd have to agree with Mantiskilla on the change of audience, but it seems that the older we get the more all genres of videogames decline in general or they're just not as appealing as it used to be. Its hard being original these days, it could be that or how the current audience prefers a game to be which will make it sell. Just an opinion thrown out there though.

Part of it is the generally declining quality as companies start to abandon their core fans for the sake of a slice of the massive causal pie. This in turn results in talented developers basically being driven out of the companies they made famous and hacks filling in the gaps. There's been a few articles about how this thinking will backfire one day.

This is also why there's been so many western developed reboots as of late: They want in on the casual action. Most fail though because the company overseeing can't grasp causal taste and their inability to do so is something no amount of western development teams will fix. What happens is that the core fans are alienated and the would be fans either don't care or detect the true nature right away.

jRPG's main hope is in the niche as there's still some measure of quality there, some measure of remembering the core fans.

In short, it's casuals' fault, though when this trend (causal gaming) does die, it'll be taking a decent chunk of companies with it as they'll be unprepared for life without them but instead all the jilted fans they've abandoned.

I'm tempted to laspe into a joking rant involving the west's love of angry bald men, regenerating health, mostly brown games, and bloom.

[Taijutsu-Joshua]

I'm tempted to laspe into a joking rant involving the west's love of angry bald men, regenerating health, mostly brown games, and bloom.


angry bald men- Cole/infamous? (sort of)
regenerating health- HALO
mostly brown games- RESISTANCE 3 LOL

[StriderTuna]

angry bald men- Cole/infamous? (sort of)
regenerating health- HALO
mostly brown games- RESISTANCE 3 LOL

Bald/angry- Kratos, common sheperd, Star Killer (angry bald dark jedi with lightsabers)

Regenerating health: various modern FPSs, including Modern Warfare. (Last time I checked regenerating health was futuristic, not modern)

Same goes for mostly brown games as folks think it's REALISTIC for a FPS to be mostly brown/gray/etc.

But I seen your remark about FFXIII in another thread, and that was quite hyped, partially due to the earlier screen shots which promised something more action packed/dyanamic than the final result. This might have caused some of the backlash that occurred as folks overhyped FFXIII into something impossible. That and the less than conventional elements of it likely turned off some causals used to "Press X to summon/win" common in some other FFs.

Me? I like it for what it is (then again I'm familiar with niche series like Tales and SMT) and the AI in FFXIII seems pretty spot on (with a Med/Hea character focusing on the leader/you the most)

[Sord]

Repetive battles? That's a thing easily tossed at wRPGs. Also some things like Tales aim to make the battles fun (and possibly making that the best part of the game); Tri-Ace is similar in that regard with the story playing second fiddle to the item creation systems and battles.

I know that, but what I meant was, in a wRPG like, say, Oblivion, the battle is over in less than a minute or so. Sometimes seconds. Where as in a turn based RPG it takes much longer unless you're just over leveled for what you're fighting. Yes, there are longer fights, but they're more the exception than the rule. Traditional RPG, which jRPGs stick much closer to, the battles can take several minutes a fight unless you're over leveled. That time compounds, quickly draining short attention spans. I realize that's a matter of the person playing it, and not so much the game itself, but it seems in general the western market prefers to have a shorter attention span.

I admittedly play more western RPGs, but I do honestly enjoy certain aspects of jRPGs. So I usually understand where both sides are coming from and don't ever knock either side (that is, I don't knock the fanbase,) because ultimately it just comes down to your personal preference.

In fact, I actually have played the SaGas series. As a kid, I loved SaGa Frontier. It was a freaking awesome game from what I can recall of it. However my opinion then and now might be different if I played through it again. I haven't seen a physical copy of that game in ages. Me and my 3 best friends (they were all brothers to one another) played the crap out of it. Though even then I thought naming characters Red and Blue was a bit silly. Also played the PS2 Romancing SaGa. My main was Sif, she was my favorite for all the norse influence attributes thrown in. I did not however beat that one, I just got bored with it. I've watched those previous mentioned friends play it for several hours though (they were also the same ones I played the Tales games with.) I enjoyed the music, visuals, and the atmosphere of Romancing Saga, but it's just not my type of gameplay anymore.

I'd say your wording of "stripping down" of RPGs is more of a jRPG thing. Myself (and most wRPG players, I would think,) see it more as integrating. Though I do admit games like Bioshock aren't the greatest shining example of an "RPG," but I still consider it one. However, it may just me my view. Not like I've ever polled anyone on it.

Honestly, there's so many things that fit under the label RPG now I honestly just think we need a new naming system all together. It's like the argument that PSU isn't an MMO. To some people the fact it's totally instance based means it isn't an MMO, to others that changes nothing (frankly I don't care either way.) It's just a conflict within the language more than anything. Even the base words themselves are vague and hazy. "Role Playing Game," okay, you play a role of a character, in a game. That's a lot of freaking games. "Massively Multiplayer Online," that's technically just about every popular online game. Definitions get decided by culture though, and if you have two competing cultures within the same vernacular, you run into a language conflict. Grey areas go everywhere, and then people bicker about genres (which I find to be admittedly stupid, you should be talking about the quality of the individual game itself!)

[StriderTuna]

But if battles in wRPGs are ending so fast, it's hard to really call them battles of decent difficulty at all, and many battles can end quickly should the party in question go all out (as opposed to fighting with the bare basics) in jRPGs. Even back in FF1; a well chosen ___2/___ra spell can do sizable damage to many enemies group if not wipe them all out in one swift blow. Though at the same time, he can't do that too often in the Nes version. Now the remake and its ports are a different story. It's rather comical once you find say a rod that casts Flare as it gives the BM free flare (a massively damaging AOE spell that has no element)

Dragon quest on the other hand.... you'd have a point as due to how traditional it is, things take some time barring some high end power playing, which takes time to get to. But it's also the last traditional game around as most of its contemporaries have either vanished or moved on to less traditional methods. FF these days is hardly tradition but rather very progressive and it was that trait that might have caught the public's eye in the past.

Though I would never recommend an RPG to anyone with a short attention span, I'd point them towards an action or shmup. There's times where I just want to engage in some brainless action as a sort of break from the RPGing I do. Oddly though the trend of causal gaming has lasted pretty long considering their attention span.

And even jRPGing have some hybrids, most famous are the Mana series (rather actionish RPG) and Castlevania symphony of the Night (Mix of CV, Super Metroid and RPG stuff resulting in one of the best games ever). In the latter, wise weapon choices can easily bring down many enemies.

While I play mainly jRPGs, I do have some interest in stuff in wRPGs, though I'm not sure how easily I can get over the wRPG sterotype of "Taking turns hitting each other, no plot, largely grind based". People bicker on the two sides due to differences in mindset and opinions and possibly someone assuming they're much better than the other.

Sorry if I sounded like I was arguing; I might have gotten a bit defensive out of reflex.

[Sord]

[spoiler-box]But if battles in wRPGs are ending so fast, it's hard to really call them battles of decent difficulty at all, and many battles can end quickly should the party in question go all out (as opposed to fighting with the bare basics) in jRPGs. Even back in FF1; a well chosen ___2/___ra spell can do sizable damage to many enemies group if not wipe them all out in one swift blow. Though at the same time, he can't do that too often in the Nes version. Now the remake and its ports are a different story. It's rather comical once you find say a rod that casts Flare as it gives the BM free flare (a massively damaging AOE spell that has no element)

Dragon quest on the other hand.... you'd have a point as due to how traditional it is, things take some time barring some high end power playing, which takes time to get to. But it's also the last traditional game around as most of its contemporaries have either vanished or moved on to less traditional methods. FF these days is hardly tradition but rather very progressive and it was that trait that might have caught the public's eye in the past.

Though I would never recommend an RPG to anyone with a short attention span, I'd point them towards an action or shmup. There's times where I just want to engage in some brainless action as a sort of break from the RPGing I do. Oddly though the trend of causal gaming has lasted pretty long considering their attention span.

And even jRPGing have some hybrids, most famous are the Mana series (rather actionish RPG) and Castlevania symphony of the Night (Mix of CV, Super Metroid and RPG stuff resulting in one of the best games ever). In the latter, wise weapon choices can easily bring down many enemies.

While I play mainly jRPGs, I do have some interest in stuff in wRPGs, though I'm not sure how easily I can get over the wRPG sterotype of "Taking turns hitting each other, no plot, largely grind based". People bicker on the two sides due to differences in mindset and opinions and possibly someone assuming they're much better than the other.

Sorry if I sounded like I was arguing; I might have gotten a bit defensive out of reflex.[/spoiler-box]

As per the difficulty thing, you're right, it's not that hard. In fact, one of Oblivions biggest criticisms was how easy it was. Same thing with the Fable series. Which also caused the play through times to be very short if you blasted straight through only story mission (another big criticism.) Thing is though, over time, games have progressively gotten less harder (in America) unless they try and sell themselves directly into the hardcore player niche. I know some games even get nerfs in difficulty when moving from Japan to the US. For whatever reason, the average player in the US seems to prefer having an easier time. I'm honestly not one of those people, but that doesn't change the fact that's how the gaming development has turned out. Replaying some NES, SNES, or Sega Genesis games, you'll find that they're a lot harder in general. Even RPGs. The first phantasy star? Hard as balls compared to most modern ones imo. Same thing with Golden Axe on the Genesis. There are some games that meet that level of difficulty, like Etrian Odyssey (played the third one, forgot what stratum I got to though.) But the majority don't seem to.

Also, you didn't sound like you were arguing at all. People have different viewpoints, that's a fact of life. I realize that, and like I said, I'm not gonna knock yah for having those views.

The only Mana game I played was for the DS, Children of Mana. Borrowed it from someone for a road trip or something. I actually really enjoyed that one a lot and got caught up in it. If the gameplay is basically the same idea some recommendations on which ones to play in the series (and are actually obtainable) would be great. I actually really enjoyed that one quite a bit. Bow and arrow was so cheap though, granted, that didn't stop me from abusing the hell out of it :wacko:

Never been a fan of Castlevania, those friends of mine I mentioned before, they love the shit out of the series. Even managed to beat the first one (and good god, you want difficulty? Play that, FFFFFFFFFF) I probably know far to much about the Belmont family for someone who's never played through a whole game. They're really into it, they look up all the original super fancy artwork and stuff and memorize the timeline of the games.

[Taijutsu-Joshua]

Bald/angry- Kratos, common sheperd, Star Killer (angry bald dark jedi with lightsabers)

Regenerating health: various modern FPSs, including Modern Warfare. (Last time I checked regenerating health was futuristic, not modern)

Same goes for mostly brown games as folks think it's REALISTIC for a FPS to be mostly brown/gray/etc.

But I seen your remark about FFXIII in another thread, and that was quite hyped, partially due to the earlier screen shots which promised something more action packed/dyanamic than the final result. This might have caused some of the backlash that occurred as folks overhyped FFXIII into something impossible. That and the less than conventional elements of it likely turned off some causals used to "Press X to summon/win" common in some other FFs.

Me? I like it for what it is (then again I'm familiar with niche series like Tales and SMT) and the AI in FFXIII seems pretty spot on (with a Med/Hea character focusing on the leader/you the most)

Tell me about it. Most fans didn't like XII either, which was also a great game.
The same old comments online that I see, such as

"Square SUCKED when it fused with Enix."
"ATLUS is what Square-Soft was in the 90's"
"I button mashed X to get my Platinum"

Shit like that. Maybe FFXIII wasn't as good as people thought it would be. But DOES NOT deserve the hate it gets.

I mean, I button mashed FFVII! And yes! I went there!

Tifa: ATTACK!
Cloud: ATTACK!
Vincent: ATTACK!

*Victory Fanfare*

[StriderTuna]

As per the difficulty thing, you're right, it's not that hard. In fact, one of Oblivions biggest criticisms was how easy it was. Same thing with the Fable series. Which also caused the play through times to be very short if you blasted straight through only story mission (another big criticism.) Thing is though, over time, games have progressively gotten less harder (in America) unless they try and sell themselves directly into the hardcore player niche. I know some games even get nerfs in difficulty when moving from Japan to the US. For whatever reason, the average player in the US seems to prefer having an easier time. I'm honestly not one of those people, but that doesn't change the fact that's how the gaming development has turned out. Replaying some NES, SNES, or Sega Genesis games, you'll find that they're a lot harder in general. Even RPGs. The first phantasy star? Hard as balls compared to most modern ones imo. Same thing with Golden Axe on the Genesis. There are some games that meet that level of difficulty, like Etrian Odyssey (played the third one, forgot what stratum I got to though.) But the majority don't seem to.

Also, you didn't sound like you were arguing at all. People have different viewpoints, that's a fact of life. I realize that, and like I said, I'm not gonna knock yah for having those views.

The only Mana game I played was for the DS, Children of Mana. Borrowed it from someone for a road trip or something. I actually really enjoyed that one a lot and got caught up in it. If the gameplay is basically the same idea some recommendations on which ones to play in the series (and are actually obtainable) would be great. I actually really enjoyed that one quite a bit. Bow and arrow was so cheap though, granted, that didn't stop me from abusing the hell out of it :wacko:

Never been a fan of Castlevania, those friends of mine I mentioned before, they love the shit out of the series. Even managed to beat the first one (and good god, you want difficulty? Play that, FFFFFFFFFF) I probably know far to much about the Belmont family for someone who's never played through a whole game. They're really into it, they look up all the original super fancy artwork and stuff and memorize the timeline of the games.

Most americans want an easy time, not so much having a real struggle. The exceptions are the SMT family (Pretty hard in general before accessing an available hard), Tales (Multiple difficulties), Tri-Ace (many games have muitiple difficulties)

Children of Mana is one of the games in the 'decline' area as the series seemed to hit its prime with Secret Of mana and Seiken Desetsu 3. Legend of Mana had some interesting elements but had some flaws. Of course the final game was Dawn of Mana (aka a KH testbed game), which basically killed the series.

SotN Is generally easier compared to the classic games as the ability to use items/spells helps you survive longer and the game has a few things that make difficulty a massive joke.


Tell me about it. Most fans didn't like XII either, which was also a great game.
The same old comments online that I see, such as

"Square SUCKED when it fused with Enix."
"ATLUS is what Square-Soft was in the 90's"
"I button mashed X to get my Platinum"

Shit like that. Maybe FFXIII wasn't as good as people thought it would be. But DOES NOT deserve the hate it gets.

I mean, I button mashed FFVII! And yes! I went there!

Tifa: ATTACK!
Cloud: ATTACK!
Vincent: ATTACK!

*Victory Fanfare*

Honestly XII had some nice parts but also some flaws, which I blame upon the fallout of the original producer quitting and a bunch causal-favoring folks coming in. It's kind of sad as the game shows signs of something truly remarkable.

And the problem with the merger wasn't Enix caused them to suck but rather the Square part started to focus on making money above all else (i.e. FFs and KHs all day everyday). And buttion mashing in FFVII is pretty easy as most characters have decent attack power and if you give them their ultimates, they'll do high damage anyways. Same thing goes for FFVIII as once you perfect a junction build, you don't need summons or magic, just repeated attacks. FFIX and FFX were a bit more tactical as the former was more traditional and the latter assigned combat roles to characters which last until quite a ways into the game (at which point you can start them on other parts of the grid)

I find FFXIII's hate senseless as it tried something new and different. Sure it wasn't perfect but at least they showed effort. Also blindly button mashing is a bad plan in FFXIII compared to thoughtul command selections and P.Shifts.

[KodiaX987]

I'll pitch in a wee bit.

I think the "games are easy lol" thing stems from ow we grew around coin-op games.

NES and Genesis games had a fair portion of arcade games that were punishingly hard, and for a reason: because they were arcade games. The were meant to suck out your quarters. Only, on a console, the business model became moot. But at the time, not many people knew better. They came in, did a 10-15 minute stint of some game and then moved on. Gradually, gaming became more oriented towards a more drawn-out adventure. And with them game a realization, as the palette expanded, that people like this or that sort of game more.

It's not that the player base pussied out. It's that at the time we had little else aside from hard games to play. Back then, "touring the cartridge" was considered a supreme accomplishment of mastery.

Now it's more about the adventure itself, rather than getting as far as possible. Which is OK really. It doesn't make a game any less fun or difficult. A game can be easily beatable yet very challenging along the way.

And myself, I shifted my focus to easier games. My job challenges me. I come back home not to get my ass destroyed by a video game, but so I can unwind. I don't want to think too much. I want to pull off good moves. So arcade-style and tough-as-nails games don't really appeal to me anymore.

[condiments]

I've never been particularly opposed to the genre, as there have been fantastic JRPGs over the generations. Games like Chrono Trigger/Cross, Vagrant Story, Pokemon, Xenogears, etc. Its just over the years I've grown to value WRPGs more because of their ambitions. I'm not talking about the latest ilk like Fallout 3, Fable, or Mass Effect, but of the "Golden Age" during the late 90's-early 00's. It was during that time that games like Fallout 1&2, Planescape: Torment, Baldur's Gate 1&2, Arcanum, Temple of Elemental Evil, Morrowind, Betrayal of Krondor, Icewind Dale, etc. were released. I thought these types of games, while less cohesive, were far more ambitious and demanding than their JRPG counterparts. Where structuring your character could determine how the entire game would react to you. JRPGs pale in comparison to the reactivity, and depth of these types of games, but have other strengths.

But the entire RPG genre is on a decline. WRPGs are only really popular today because they've defanged the RPG elements, and emphasize the "action". Its gotten so bad that games like Mass Effect 2 are universally regarded as full blown RPGs rather than a TPS with RPG elements.

[StriderTuna]

I'll pitch in a wee bit.

I think the "games are easy lol" thing stems from ow we grew around coin-op games.

NES and Genesis games had a fair portion of arcade games that were punishingly hard, and for a reason: because they were arcade games. The were meant to suck out your quarters. Only, on a console, the business model became moot. But at the time, not many people knew better. They came in, did a 10-15 minute stint of some game and then moved on. Gradually, gaming became more oriented towards a more drawn-out adventure. And with them game a realization, as the palette expanded, that people like this or that sort of game more.

It's not that the player base pussied out. It's that at the time we had little else aside from hard games to play. Back then, "touring the cartridge" was considered a supreme accomplishment of mastery.

Now it's more about the adventure itself, rather than getting as far as possible. Which is OK really. It doesn't make a game any less fun or difficult. A game can be easily beatable yet very challenging along the way.

And myself, I shifted my focus to easier games. My job challenges me. I come back home not to get my ass destroyed by a video game, but so I can unwind. I don't want to think too much. I want to pull off good moves. So arcade-style and tough-as-nails games don't really appeal to me anymore.

Other reasons were limitations of the hardware and software. Take the original FF1, mages had 8 spell levels max and each level only had 9 uses at most. This makes it a bit hard to blast your way through various random encounters barring finding certain spell-casting items. There's also the fact the only ways to heal MP was an inn or a tent/cottage (only usable outside; there were no indoor save points yet) There was no easy way to press A/X and win, even with a 4 monk/fighter/ninja build, only one character would be well equiped with the other 3 getting the scraps. That and the fact that one way or another Monks were glass cannons, even at higher levels.

I play the non mainstream RPGs due to the challenge of making you think and the interesting battle systems.


I've never been particularly opposed to the genre, as there have been fantastic JRPGs over the generations. Games like Chrono Trigger/Cross, Vagrant Story, Pokemon, Xenogears, etc. Its just over the years I've grown to value WRPGs more because of their ambitions. I'm not talking about the latest ilk like Fallout 3, Fable, or Mass Effect, but of the "Golden Age" during the late 90's-early 00's. It was during that time that games like Fallout 1&2, Planescape: Torment, Baldur's Gate 1&2, Arcanum, Temple of Elemental Evil, Morrowind, Betrayal of Krondor, Icewind Dale, etc. were released. I thought these types of games, while less cohesive, were far more ambitious and demanding than their JRPG counterparts. Where structuring your character could determine how the entire game would react to you. JRPGs pale in comparison to the reactivity, and depth of these types of games, but have other strengths.

But the entire RPG genre is on a decline. WRPGs are only really popular today because they've defanged the RPG elements, and emphasize the "action". Its gotten so bad that games like Mass Effect 2 are universally regarded as full blown RPGs rather than a TPS with RPG elements.

True but you might be ignoring the niche games like Valkyrie profile, Star Ocean, Tales, SMT. The tales series is an example of an engine chronically being fine-tuned/adjusted with the occasional new evolution. The ignorant call it innovative, the smart call it sticking with what works.

But I mentioned that when I sad Bioshock wasn't an RPG. It takes more than an upgrade system and a decent story to be a RPG.

[condiments]

True but you might be ignoring the niche games like Valkyrie profile, Star Ocean, Tales, SMT. The tales series is an example of an engine chronically being fine-tuned/adjusted with the occasional new evolution. The ignorant call it innovative, the smart call it sticking with what works.

But I mentioned that when I sad Bioshock wasn't an RPG. It takes more than an upgrade system and a decent story to be a RPG.

I actually hold a high level of respect for the Persona/SMT games for their originality, and great game mechanics. Persona 4 was one of the strongest JRPG releases in years(I could say Demon's souls too, but that is a bit of "grey" area).

I think there are two main problems problem ailing JRPGs/WRPGs:

1) They just aren't feasible anymore in this current market unless you have gigantic financial backing. At least, for what I would consider the RPGs of yore. RPGs back then could get away with partial/no voice-acting, and loads of content/quests because of lower production values. Having to pay for these additional production values in turn:
2) makes developers seek the unwashed mass. The kind of gamer who recoils at the mere prospect of having to manipulate numbers despite what they entail. I'm not saying every RPG needs to be "SUPER NUMBER CRUNCHER LEET", but there should at least be some diversity. Now the only thing anyone makes is action RPGs with boring stats/skill trees.

So....its a pretty grim future for RPGs. JRPGs are being ridiculed and dwindling, and the very identity of WRPGs is being engulfed into the action/shooter genre. Thankfully they'll be indies to pick up the slack in the future. If you're into good RPGs StriderTuna you should check out "Age of Decadence" and "Dead State".

[StriderTuna]

I actually hold a high level of respect for the Persona/SMT games for their originality, and great game mechanics. Persona 4 was one of the strongest JRPG releases in years(I could say Demon's souls too, but that is a bit of "grey" area).

I think there are two main problems problem ailing JRPGs/WRPGs:

1) They just aren't feasible anymore in this current market unless you have gigantic financial backing. At least, for what I would consider the RPGs of yore. RPGs back then could get away with partial/no voice-acting, and loads of content/quests because of lower production values. Having to pay for these additional production values in turn:
2) makes developers seek the unwashed mass. The kind of gamer who recoils at the mere prospect of having to manipulate numbers despite what they entail. I'm not saying every RPG needs to be "SUPER NUMBER CRUNCHER LEET", but there should at least be some diversity. Now the only thing anyone makes is action RPGs with boring stats/skill trees.

So....its a pretty grim future for RPGs. JRPGs are being ridiculed and dwindling, and the very identity of WRPGs is being engulfed into the action/shooter genre. Thankfully they'll be indies to pick up the slack in the future. If you're into good RPGs StriderTuna you should check out "Age of Decadence" and "Dead State".

I did mention earlier how jRPGs seem to be driven back into the niches so unless SE adjust, they'll be in trouble, though the various niche companies should do alright as they never abandoned the core players.

[condiments]

I did mention earlier how jRPGs seem to be driven back into the niches so unless SE adjust, they'll be in trouble, though the various niche companies should do alright as they never abandoned the core players.

Yeah, companies likes Atlus can continue to make games for the appropriate audiences without having to mess with their product. Apparently "Catherine" has seen quite a bit of success, with Atlus saying its one of the best releases responses they've had. Dark Souls will similarly sell well considering the growing hype surrounding it, and its sheer quality.

Bigger companies like Square-Enix have to walk a different path, where they have to cater to both of their bases. Bioware recently found this out the hard way with Dragon Age 2, where they strayed too much from the original which resulted in less sales from fans, and newcomers simply weren't there to recoup those loses(I didn't buy, but I did for DA:O). In this day and age, its bad when a game sells less than its predecessor.

So Square needs to find that fine line between catering to their core, and roping in new fans. Versus XIII might be the answer considering its an action RPG made by the team who did KH which is one of squares most popular franchises. Honestly, I think they need to take on less projects at a time, you can see the strain on the games they release.

[StriderTuna]

Yeah, companies likes Atlus can continue to make games for the appropriate audiences without having to mess with their product. Apparently "Catherine" has seen quite a bit of success, with Atlus saying its one of the best releases responses they've had. Dark Souls will similarly sell well considering the growing hype surrounding it, and its sheer quality.

Bigger companies like Square-Enix have to walk a different path, where they have to cater to both of their bases. Bioware recently found this out the hard way with Dragon Age 2, where they strayed too much from the original which resulted in less sales from fans, and newcomers simply weren't there to recoup those loses(I didn't buy, but I did for DA:O). In this day and age, its bad when a game sells less than its predecessor.

So Square needs to find that fine line between catering to their core, and roping in new fans. Versus XIII might be the answer considering its an action RPG made by the team who did KH which is one of squares most popular franchises. Honestly, I think they need to take on less projects at a time, you can see the strain on the games they release.

Yeah... and particularly SE doesn't have that much talent left on the Square side (The Enix side still has most of its orginal talent, including Tri-Ace), they're best hope is to take the best talent from so-so series like KH and apply them towards superior games as in particular the Mana series being dead and possibly most of the talent behind that went elsewhere in the wake.

I'm not sure what Bioware was thinking with DA2 as they had a working formula with the first game but what happened with the second was hype backlash at least. I heard DA2 had worse graphics than the first game even.

Atlus and From Software (developers of Armored Core, 3d dot heroes, and Demon's Soul/Dark Souls) have always been nich aimed. In particularly From Soft. wasn't expecting Demon's Soul to as well as it did; they made it because they wanted to. Then again I consider From Software one of the few japanese companies with a good understanding of the western mindset as Armored Core is more a wMecha style game than a jMecha. And while Atlus might have hit gold somewhat with the PS2 Personas and Catherine, their other projects show they have yet to go soft or casual.

[Akaimizu]

"I'm not sure what Bioware was thinking with DA2 as they had a working formula with the first game but what happened with the second was hype backlash at least. I heard DA2 had worse graphics than the first game even."

The biggest mistake they made was thinking they can do the same thing to DA2 as they did with Mass Effect. It's a case of not understanding the audience. Mass Effect was made out to be the progressive RPG that is to streamline more and more of the constant stat screen/inventory management of RPGs and concentrate more on fluid combat and Character Role-playing (making decisions, treating certain folks one way or another way). Still keeping all those complicated RPG roll systems in the background.

Dragon Age, on the other hand, was taken to be the game that keeps more of the slower but stat-screen heavy/classic inventory management game closer to NWN or Baldur's Gate (PC). That is, the series for traditionalists. Alas, when DA2 started to go the way of Mass Effect, a lot of players balked at the change because they wanted Dragon Age to still hold onto more traditional RPG gameplay aspects. Or at least as far as earlier Bioware games took it, and not THAT much further to the progressive "more action"/streamlined form. So in a way, some people felt betrayed because it felt like a threat that Bioware will stop making games for traditionalists.

To a degree, I sort of agree with them, even though I enjoy DA2. I think it would've been nice for Bioware to support both aspects of their ventures. Appease the traditionalists and the progressives. Dragon Age looked to appeal to their HUGE traditionalist crowd that they kind of didn't cater to in Mass Effect. I certainly bet the NEXT Dragon Age will bring back some of the traditional systems, if they know what they're doing. Leave that progressive stuff to Mass Effect since it started in that route, and it seems meant to do so. Progressive doesn't mean better all the time, the style change is akin to never dying tastes. It's like having a prominent music company, without a lot of peers, who used to make Jazz charts AND modern progressive music; suddenly feel like they're about to threaten to drop Jazz altogether. And like both are just as relevant to music, these different paradigms of execution are just as relevant to video RPGs. In certain ways, both approaches try to cater the focus of depth from table-top RPGs, but heavily slated towards different areas of player management.

Do I have any fear for the JRPG? No. They're survivors. I completely and honestly expect an actual Renaissance in JRPG gaming. There's something very good happening in Japan, right now. Various extremely talented developers, who carry their heart-felt love for creating great and imaginative gaming are starting their own studios.

One of my favorite semi-traditional RPGs of recent time "Lost Odyssey" happened that way. And what a refreshing quest it was, and had some truly awesome challenges in it. The story was also unusual and refreshing, if not often sad.

But Mistwalker is, by far, not the only ones. I expect to see some interesting stuff to come from these new teams, which usually consist of folks who felt the industry has cause the Japanese development to stagnate. A sort of revolution, so to speak. When I argue that something is not happening the way it should, it's more for the wake-up call to get them to really push forward, not an issue about giving up on the industry altogether.

[StriderTuna]

Funny how you mention Mistwalker as it's a studio Hironobu Sakaguchi of Final Fantasy fame help found. And I'm seriously hoping they find the right spot to get recognized like they should. As the 360 and Wii aren't exactly jRPG hotspots.

This reminds me of Microsoft's jRPG cultivating project and some of the hybridish games that came about. I say that as games like Lost Odyssey, and a few others have some bits of wRPG elements in them. I suspect the effort backfired as the mix put off fans of both. It's a shame that most won't ever be on the PS3 as at the moment it's looking to be the system to go to for jRPGs. I mean I'd imagine many of those games doing better on it now as there's a fanbase building up now.

Yeah jRPGs aren't going to end... just receed into the niche where at that point a new "leader" would arise. The biggest problems these small companies have is finding a way to stand out from the fat cats, console wastelands, etc.

Also I always thought Dragon Age was "Typical wRPGing in a prettier and overly hyped package" That may be mean traditionalist, but I can't say. It reminds me of DQ and FF, one's very traditional and the other's very progressive.

[Akaimizu]

Kind of, but Bioware games are LOADED with story presentation. They tend to straddle the line between the kind of in-your-face story telling of the JRPG and the freedom to be your own character of the WRPG. They started to work towards that fever pitch in by having plenty of story details about individual characters in which you learn more about their backstory as you go along. Plus the political and world mythos and landscape.

Heck. Planescape Torment had more story to cuddle in within the first few hours than some *more prominent story-based* JRPGs do in their entire playthrough. So not all WRPGs are the same. The way Bioware often tells a story is a near polar opposite of how the *open world freedom* game Elder Scrolls does. Elder Scrolls does have plenty of story and backdrop, but the presentation isn't as force fed or direct. It's put in sparse form for the player to run into at their own pace, yet not as *personal* to your character oftentimes because they tend to make more consessions for generic dialogue that can fit a wide range of types. Bioware generally deals a little more with a feeling of the *you* of your character in how NPCs react to you. That's their push.

[condiments]

Funny how you mention Mistwalker as it's a studio Hironobu Sakaguchi of Final Fantasy fame help found. And I'm seriously hoping they find the right spot to get recognized like they should. As the 360 and Wii aren't exactly jRPG hotspots.

This reminds me of Microsoft's jRPG cultivating project and some of the hybridish games that came about. I say that as games like Lost Odyssey, and a few others have some bits of wRPG elements in them. I suspect the effort backfired as the mix put off fans of both. It's a shame that most won't ever be on the PS3 as at the moment it's looking to be the system to go to for jRPGs. I mean I'd imagine many of those games doing better on it now as there's a fanbase building up now.

Yeah jRPGs aren't going to end... just receed into the niche where at that point a new "leader" would arise. The biggest problems these small companies have is finding a way to stand out from the fat cats, console wastelands, etc.

Also I always thought Dragon Age was "Typical wRPGing in a prettier and overly hyped package" That may be mean traditionalist, but I can't say. It reminds me of DQ and FF, one's very traditional and the other's very progressive.

Well the "draw" of the original Dragon Age, at least for many of the fans, was that it was touted as a successor to 'Baldur's Gate 2'. BG2 is considered by many to be Bioware's magnum opus, and one of the best RPGs of all time. I would tend to agree with it being one of my favorite games of all time. Really, a lot of fans were excited about a return to the great breadth, and complexity of their more traditional games, rather than the more streamlined recent efforts.

They mostly succeeded with Dragon Age: Origins. I LIKED the game, but I wouldn't call it a classic due to many design oversights, and banal story/dialogue. However, they "ensured" with the franchise they would build upon an already solid base. When the "announcements" started to pour in about DA2, there was a large uproar from fans who saw the series going in the complete opposite direction. I knew it was clear form the start that Bioware had completely different design intention with the game than DA:O. Bioware had single handedly raised long dead hopes with the appeal of Dragon Age: Origins, and then shattered them like a mirage. So yes, people were quite upset. It also reflected in the lower sales numbers, and critical reception as well.

It takes a long time to build your reputation, but one release to lose it. I'm going to be more wary of Bioware games from now on. Their failure should serve as a reminder of straying too far from your fanbase for another. The fans you seek might not be as willing to buy your products as you think.

[Akaimizu]

True. But I think Bioware has a lifeline because they've shown, multiple times, that they do listen to their fans and strive to improve things for them in the next. People will be wary, but I've been with them long enough to still hold onto the idea that they will do what they can to make amends with them on the next DA. Since people also voted with their dollar and was clear on why, there's no *corporate* reason to go against the wishes, either.

[condiments]

True. But I think Bioware has a lifeline because they've shown, multiple times, that they do listen to their fans and strive to improve things for them in the next. People will be wary, but I've been with them long enough to still hold onto the idea that they will do what they can to make amends with them on the next DA. Since people also voted with their dollar and was clear on why, there's no *corporate* reason to go against the wishes, either.

Agreed. I'm not ruling out that I won't purchase another Bioware game(ME3 looks impressive), its just that Dragon Age 2 was so unlike their previous efforts in terms of quality. It wasn't unplayable, but it was just....mediocre. I'm not sure what went wrong in the development process, but hopefully they've learned from it.

Actually now that I think about it, wasn't DA:O the highest selling game they've released? They'll definitely attempt to try and replicate that success again.

[StriderTuna]

Kind of, but Bioware games are LOADED with story presentation. They tend to straddle the line between the kind of in-your-face story telling of the JRPG and the freedom to be your own character of the WRPG. They started to work towards that fever pitch in by having plenty of story details about individual characters in which you learn more about their backstory as you go along. Plus the political and world mythos and landscape.

Heck. Planescape Torment had more story to cuddle in within the first few hours than some *more prominent story-based* JRPGs do in their entire playthrough. So not all WRPGs are the same. The way Bioware often tells a story is a near polar opposite of how the *open world freedom* game Elder Scrolls does. Elder Scrolls does have plenty of story and backdrop, but the presentation isn't as force fed or direct. It's put in sparse form for the player to run into at their own pace, yet not as *personal* to your character oftentimes because they tend to make more consessions for generic dialogue that can fit a wide range of types. Bioware generally deals a little more with a feeling of the *you* of your character in how NPCs react to you. That's their push.

hearing about TES reminds me of the SaGa series as they're rather similar in how open world they are.


Well the "draw" of the original Dragon Age, at least for many of the fans, was that it was touted as a successor to 'Baldur's Gate 2'. BG2 is considered by many to be Bioware's magnum opus, and one of the best RPGs of all time. I would tend to agree with it being one of my favorite games of all time. Really, a lot of fans were excited about a return to the great breadth, and complexity of their more traditional games, rather than the more streamlined recent efforts.

They mostly succeeded with Dragon Age: Origins. I LIKED the game, but I wouldn't call it a classic due to many design oversights, and banal story/dialogue. However, they "ensured" with the franchise they would build upon an already solid base. When the "announcements" started to pour in about DA2, there was a large uproar from fans who saw the series going in the complete opposite direction. I knew it was clear form the start that Bioware had completely different design intention with the game than DA:O. Bioware had single handedly raised long dead hopes with the appeal of Dragon Age: Origins, and then shattered them like a mirage. So yes, people were quite upset. It also reflected in the lower sales numbers, and critical reception as well.

It takes a long time to build your reputation, but one release to lose it. I'm going to be more wary of Bioware games from now on. Their failure should serve as a reminder of straying too far from your fanbase for another. The fans you seek might not be as willing to buy your products as you think.

Heh, some said similar things about certain FF games, the betrayal of the core players. One might assume Bioware gotten a bit confused on where to go with the 2nd game.

[condiments]

Heck. Planescape Torment had more story to cuddle in within the first few hours than some *more prominent story-based* JRPGs do in their entire playthrough. So not all WRPGs are the same. The way Bioware often tells a story is a near polar opposite of how the *open world freedom* game Elder Scrolls does. Elder Scrolls does have plenty of story and backdrop, but the presentation isn't as force fed or direct. It's put in sparse form for the player to run into at their own pace, yet not as *personal* to your character oftentimes because they tend to make more consessions for generic dialogue that can fit a wide range of types. Bioware generally deals a little more with a feeling of the *you* of your character in how NPCs react to you. That's their push.

Oh, the mere mention of Planescape: Torment makes my eyes glaze over with favored remembrance. Now THAT is how you tell a sweeping, personal story while still allowing to mold your character to how you want. I honestly wish Black Isle was still around so they could produce more complete story-driven experience like that game.

I'm hopeful about Skyrim, but all this talk of cutting skills is making me apprehensive.

[StriderTuna]

Well my fond memories are more of FFIV and FFVI than anything else.

[Sord]

Oh, the mere mention of Planescape: Torment makes my eyes glaze over with favored remembrance. Now THAT is how you tell a sweeping, personal story while still allowing to mold your character to how you want. I honestly wish Black Isle was still around so they could produce more complete story-driven experience like that game.

I'm hopeful about Skyrim, but all this talk of cutting skills is making me apprehensive.

I actually didn't get to play this game until a few months back. Was looking for a cheap game on GoG, something in the classic cRPG style (I was a heavy Neverwinter Nights player on the first one.) Holy shit, can't believed that game was completely missed when I was younger. Great story execution, and the dark wit throughout was quite nice. Can't say as much for the engine, but it runs on the original Baldur's Gate engine (forget what it's called,) so it's to be expected. But oh man, fuck getting the Modron, I did it, but good lord, fuck that randomly generated maze. The final path was literally the very last one I took. OUPH.

[condiments]

I actually didn't get to play this game until a few months back. Was looking for a cheap game on GoG, something in the classic cRPG style (I was a heavy Neverwinter Nights player on the first one.) Holy shit, can't believed that game was completely missed when I was younger. Great story execution, and the dark wit throughout was quite nice. Can't say as much for the engine, but it runs on the original Baldur's Gate engine (forget what it's called,) so it's to be expected. But oh man, fuck getting the Modron, I did it, but good lord, fuck that randomly generated maze. The final path was literally the very last one I took. OUPH.

Yeah its easily one of the best storylines and writing I've seen in videogames. Granted, there is a LOT of text, but all of its sheer quality. Its one of the few good 'personal' stories where objective isn't to save the world/universe. Its just the PC, the companions you recruit, having to deal with the mystery and intrigue of the nameless one's past. I loved the Planescape universe because of how bizarre/foreign the society and culture is. There is one point in the game where you can simply argue a man out of existence! How awesome is that?

I think this game is a testament to my argument in this thread. You simply can't make games like that anymore.

[StriderTuna]

It does make me wonder how more people haven't tried making hybrid games as I think certain elements could be mixed.

[KodiaX987]

It does make me wonder how more people haven't tried making hybrid games as I think certain elements could be mixed.

You mean [x] with [y] elements in it?

[StriderTuna]

You mean [x] with [y] elements in it?

Yeah the closest I've seen are the Star Ocean (3 excluded games) and it's basically actionish jRPGs but with a skill system usually found in wRPGs, affecting stats, out of battle tasks, and combat ability.

I'd imagine if someone thought about mixing the two seriously, something nice could be made.

[Taijutsu-Joshua]

You mean like the synthesizing? Boy, that had me all kinds of interested when I first used it in SO3.

[Akaimizu]

Mixing the two correctly takes a lot of time. Quite a few years, and enough experiments to make it work. The Western teams like Bioware and Bethesda is working extremely hard to give everybody their cake and being able to eat it too.

However, the pristine mix takes a real long time to land. Even the Elder Scrolls games have been continuously getting closer and closer to the suck-you-in narrative while offering their extremely complex free-open-world infinite-character-possibilities realm. Those who played through their last game (The Shivering Isles) will probably have seen them at their narrative best for such an experience. However, a release like that wouldn't be possible without all the work they did on previous Elder Scrolls games, leading up to it. So figuratively, the games have developed over a 20 year period.

So the idea of western PC complexities in a narrative more known from the eastern consoles is a task that several shades tougher than just some standard Western "high variation in character build" freedom of choice PC RPG done by a relatively new studio, and insanely tougher than a much more controlled (much easier to bugfix) more linear eastern console narrative where you are exactly what the fixed story dictated.

There's a reason why RPG maker folks generally whip up JRPG games in such short time. Create simple limitations, concentrate all on a book-like story for folks to follow in nice text bubbles, as long as it sticks to classic RPG combat. However, it takes a great deal longer than any of those elements, to craft an RPG with a great variety of character choices, freedom of how to tackle things, and avoid crippling bugs. They almost never attempt the Western take because it's too complex. Much less Elder Scrolls. You play a JRPG, particularly the big budget ones, you see beautiful landscapes with precise exact locations for you to run. Thus, all kinds of stuff you look at, you will never touch or get to. You stay on the paths. Elder scrolls, every pixel is accessible, the only paths are the ones that are visibly placed that way, but you can go anywhere off them you like. Things like the new Fable games are in-between the two concepts. Needless to say, the months of careful work needed to make the Elder Scrolls design, is as large an amount of time that entire JRPG could be made with the same man power.

Why more people don't do it? Time, Money, and Resources. To do it all requires more than most companies can afford to do. Unless they are lucky to have all in-house resources, and everybody agreed to make it a labor of love.

[StriderTuna]

You mean like the synthesizing? Boy, that had me all kinds of interested when I first used it in SO3.

I excluded 3 as its skill system was dumbed down and overly NPC-reliant compared to the other games.


Mixing the two correctly takes a lot of time. Quite a few years, and enough experiments to make it work. The Western teams like Bioware and Bethesda is working extremely hard to give everybody their cake and being able to eat it too.

However, the pristine mix takes a real long time to land. Even the Elder Scrolls games have been continuously getting closer and closer to the suck-you-in narrative while offering their extremely complex free-open-world infinite-character-possibilities realm. Those who played through their last game (The Shivering Isles) will probably have seen them at their narrative best for such an experience. However, a release like that wouldn't be possible without all the work they did on previous Elder Scrolls games, leading up to it. So figuratively, the games have developed over a 20 year period.

So the idea of western PC complexities in a narrative more known from the eastern consoles is a task that several shades tougher than just some standard Western "high variation in character build" freedom of choice PC RPG done by a relatively new studio, and insanely tougher than a much more controlled (much easier to bugfix) more linear eastern console narrative where you are exactly what the fixed story dictated.

There's a reason why RPG maker folks generally whip up JRPG games in such short time. Create simple limitations, concentrate all on a book-like story for folks to follow in nice text bubbles, as long as it sticks to classic RPG combat. However, it takes a great deal longer than any of those elements, to craft a RPG with a great variety of character choices, freedom of how to tackle things, and avoid crippling bugs. They almost never attempt the Western take because it's too complex. Much less Elder Scrolls. You play a JRPG, particularly the big budget ones, you see beautiful landscapes with precise exact locations for you to run. Thus, all kinds of stuff you look at, you will never touch or get to. You stay on the paths. Elder scrolls, every pixel is accessible, the only paths are the ones that are visibly placed that way, but you can go anywhere off them you like. Things like the new Fable games are in-between the two concepts. Needless to say, the months of careful work needed to make the Elder Scrolls design, is as large an amount of time that entire JRPG could be made with the same man power.

Why more people don't do it? Time, Money, and Resources. To do it all requires more than most companies can afford to do. Unless they are lucky to have all in-house resources, and everybody agreed to make it a labor of love.

It raises the question: how much freedom is really necessary? as wide open spaces can prove more trouble than they're worth. But some modern jpgs do overdo the tunnels but at the same time some give you wide open plains. Hybridization isn't that difficult, but one must admit that it won't be a perfect mix but rather a mix of pure points and compromises.

[Sord]

It raises the question: how much freedom is really necessary? as wide open spaces can prove more trouble than they're worth. But some modern jpgs do overdo the tunnels but at the same time some give you wide open plains. Hybridization isn't that difficult, but one must admit that it won't be a perfect mix but rather a mix of pure points and compromises.

The "answer" to that question is more of an opinion than any actual fact. Some people like open sandbox and others don't care for it. The closest thing you could call a "fact" for that would be whichever degree of either sells the best, but since games are bought for numerous other reasons than just that, it's not like you'll ever be given a greatly accurate judgement.

[Kion]

I caught up half way through the topic. I'm going to toss in my two cents as my laptop's batteries are quickly fading.

I haven't played too many wRPG's. They tend to be middle-earth choose your own path fantasy games (elder scrolls, fable) from what I can make out.

In terms of jRPG's i think they got popular at a time when the hardware was still behind. Turn based was a way to pick up the action and make a long adventure on bad hardware. Tales of Symphonia is the most recent game i've played that's actually added on to the formula.

The largest factor i think is the story aspect. As an adolescent I found it was a lot of fun playing through a fake romance, but now that I'm married I really don't care at all. It's going to take more story than some emo-git going through puberty to get me to sit through 40 hours of long boring cut scenes.

[StriderTuna]

Well the real peak of RPGs was FF7, which isn't really turn based at all (menu based sure), but the remark about age might have something to do with it, in both interest and plot. After all adults don't exactly care to keep on playing young unsure teens as opposed to a more mature sure of themself hero that is common in wRPGs.

[Akaimizu]

Actually, there were lots of different peaks. The biggest separation of WRPGs and JRPGs, and why so many people don't understand the opposite, is because the WRPGs were, for a long time, only on the computers. The JRPGs were significantly Console-only ones.

So if you had a computer, you could easily follow the history of WRPGs, and know the highlights and such. They were the first video RPGs in existence, you know. However, the complexity of what is necessary to save data was too much for the Console carts to hold. A technology problem, more than anything. So in general, they didn't get ported to consoles. Still such a problem existed with the limited-space memory cards.

It really wasn't until the advent of technology, console-wise, that was powerful enough (and with certain necessary hardware (built-in) as standard) to maintain the current WRPG data structure before they could invade the console-space and get big. Before, the JRPG didn't worry about WRPGs because they hardly ever get on the console, and if they did, they were select ones that required low data overhead. So console exclusitivity was helpful in securing an audience and also training them to associate a specific standard for which all RPGs appeared. It's how a game like Dragon Quest could get so big, even though the first 3 games started out as watered-down simplified Ultima games. It's also why I can look at it objectively because I was blessed with computer and console. I had no such consumer programming.

Of course, the simplification did help to aid the game's appeal to a wider audience, for some might have gotten a little lost in the more recent Ultimas, available at that time, given the player's need to follow clues and actually type in subjects when asking NPCs to find out new answers. Dragon Quest continued to follow the even older style of Western NPCs where they each had 1 thing to say, and the moment you talked to them, they said everything they needed to say to you.

But most important was the fact that saved data was small. Everything you did, your placement, and everything was limited. You had simple character stats, several little boolean flags, and that's it. Made simpler because they limited you to where you could save your game. And when dealing with a linear story structure, you can really control and squeeze data because you can easily assume Parts A, B, and C were done when the player is on Part D.

So anyway, with the advent of the Xbox, it was the first console (at the time) which sold with hardware equivalent to a modest PC and a built-in Harddrive. Space and Data issue solved. No longer tied to the relatively small space of memory card standards, dealing with blocks, etc; and can use the faster HD to buffer data required by the current WRPGs. And thus it just took one developer to attempt a full-blown WRPG on the console and see if it could capture an audience on consoles, like they did on the PCs. Enter Bethesda (unlike Bioware, or others that created console-specific games of their licenses) they put a full-blown PC Western RPG (100+ hours of gameplay) on a console. They took a big risk. It paid off in spades. The rest is history.

Throughout history of Computer RPGs (the WRPGs, as we've seen), the entire idea was to do whatever they can to Bring all the dynamic aspects of the Table Top RPG (the original RPG) to the computer. They will continue to strive for that, and they haven't left that goal. JRPGs first thought of the technology limitations of data storage for consoles, and felt that telling a structured linear movie-like story is the way to go. Giving less character choices because it's a whole lot less data to store. Mostly because due to limitations of variance, you can store a lot less data to make it work. Removing human choices is a great way to cut down on data. Making it movie-like is a great way to give the players something to not give them the want for choices, especially on a platform in which they were never really given those choices in the first place.

So really, all this comes down to, is that nowadays, we actually have a situation in which (for the first time) a great majority of console players actually get to see RPGs that strive for the choices of Table Top ones, and now they have a dillemma because they've seen another way to look at RPGs. So is the way of a market that was previously a monopoly now having choices. It's really not a surprise that we'll see some ebb and flow. But what does this mean? For me. Progress. Simply as that. JRPGs will try to improve on while retaining some aspects that make them JRPGs, and WRPGs will continue to strive to get better as well. I forsee something very simple to say. Better RPGs to come in the future. We will see improvement, but alas, you can experiment and grow, without missteps, unless you are very lucky. Seeing such in JRPGs means they are doing what the West did years ago. They are taking some risks with their fans to improve upon the formula via experimentation. That's a good thing, in the long run.

[condiments]

Yeah, on the Xbox we saw Bioware's release of Knights of the Old Republic, Bethesda's Morrowind, and later Oblivion on the 360. For a lot of players not familiar with the wRPG genre, these types of games blindsided them. You could really tell the difference in design philosophies between the jRPG/wRPG by comparing the RPGs at the time.

I think in a lot of ways, JRPGs developers became too enamored with their own design. I don't think they need to completely abandon their ways and go WRPG 2.0, but they should give the player a little more control.

[NoiseHERO]

I want a chrono trigger remake.

FF4 got remade/ported like 12 times now?

[Akaimizu]

I think in a lot of ways, JRPGs developers became too enamored with their own design. I don't think they need to completely abandon their ways and go WRPG 2.0, but they should give the player a little more control.

True. I believe in the same. The giving the player of more control will automatically add some complexities, but they don't have to go all full tilt with it. Work in those baby steps. You can't expect to just leap and keep the money rolling in.

Of course, it's tougher for the console game makers. You can do the same experimentation on PCs and Macs with much less of a budget, and thus don't have to worry about every game (and experiement) selling so many copies (at price) to break even.

Thus why things like Xbox Live Arcade was made. PSN and Nintendo's e-Shop. That way, companies can at least code these *important* aspects of the engine required to push things forward, without the expectation that they throw tons of money in the CGI FMV department, and other things. These are cheaper games, and mostly because they cost a load less to make. Much safer territory to branch out and experiment. As seen with the latest Summer of Arcade titles. The majority, so far, being new experiments with which they seem to be doing quite well. This could work for RPGs as well.

I also think this will also throw more interest in JRPGs moving away from standard anime-cliches and strive even more to jump away to more unusual flavors. I already mentioned such a more recent game. Stuff like Lost Odyssey. It was *way* out there, even when you take into consideration the characters themselves. Very unlike anything inspired by the 12-15 or so well-known anime character architypes that are re-used so often.

So yes. I see this already happening with the *break off* companies. The ones in which great or well-known old game makers decide to leave their parent companies to form their own. All of them with the tought that Japanese entertainment has grown complacent and has lost the drive to experiment and make something new. It's this Rennaissance in which I see a big future coming from. All it takes is for enough of them to hit big and everything else will have to follow suit. Though the big corps may get complacent in the new way, these Pioneers shall control the forward movement of Japanese gaming. I'm actually excited for those guys. Heck, I'd work for em.

[StriderTuna]

True. I believe in the same. The giving the player of more control will automatically add some complexities, but they don't have to go all full tilt with it. Work in those baby steps. You can't expect to just leap and keep the money rolling in.

Of course, it's tougher for the console game makers. You can do the same experimentation on PCs and Macs with much less of a budget, and thus don't have to worry about every game (and experiement) selling so many copies (at price) to break even.

Thus why things like Xbox Live Arcade was made. PSN and Nintendo's e-Shop. That way, companies can at least code these *important* aspects of the engine required to push things forward, without the expectation that they throw tons of money in the CGI FMV department, and other things. These are cheaper games, and mostly because they cost a load less to make. Much safer territory to branch out and experiment. As seen with the latest Summer of Arcade titles. The majority, so far, being new experiments with which they seem to be doing quite well. This could work for RPGs as well.

I also think this will also throw more interest in JRPGs moving away from standard anime-cliches and strive even more to jump away to more unusual flavors. I already mentioned such a more recent game. Stuff like Lost Odyssey. It was *way* out there, even when you take into consideration the characters themselves. Very unlike anything inspired by the 12-15 or so well-known anime character architypes that are re-used so often.

So yes. I see this already happening with the *break off* companies. The ones in which great or well-known old game makers decide to leave their parent companies to form their own. All of them with the tought that Japanese entertainment has grown complacent and has lost the drive to experiment and make something new. It's this Rennaissance in which I see a big future coming from. All it takes is for enough of them to hit big and everything else will have to follow suit. Though the big corps may get complacent in the new way, these Pioneers shall control the forward movement of Japanese gaming. I'm actually excited for those guys. Heck, I'd work for em.

It'll take time for the new small companies to get going as their quirky system choices and being overshadowed by bigger games makes it difficult for them. The biggest problems for them is fan reaction as if something's too different, they will cry bloody murder. Nichier companies are able to do more as their fanbases are more understanding and don't sink as much excess resources into things like SE. This is also a problem with gaming in general: Too much escalation, even for the PC market (which is fond of doing things as to give the most expensive video card reason for existing) Sooner or later what market there is will not be able to support the increasing cost games. Nintendo while taking a more modest path, is the console company best able to spring back from a possible crash as they've been cultivating a new fanbase.


Yeah, on the Xbox we saw Bioware's release of Knights of the Old Republic, Bethesda's Morrowind, and later Oblivion on the 360. For a lot of players not familiar with the wRPG genre, these types of games blindsided them. You could really tell the difference in design philosophies between the jRPG/wRPG by comparing the RPGs at the time.

I think in a lot of ways, JRPGs developers became too enamored with their own design. I don't think they need to completely abandon their ways and go WRPG 2.0, but they should give the player a little more control.

I think some hybridization would do jRPGs some good, though the really experimental stuff such as alternative morality paths and such are found in the deepest niches. I also think it relates to japanese mentality compared to american mentality. The japanese are more likely to enjoy a trip despite how narrow it is while the Americans want to explore everything, even if it's ultimately pointless.

This came up with the game killer 7, which was pretty on-rails. The Amer. gamer would be upset over the lack of freedom while the Japanese gamer would conclude the untaken paths weren't important.

Something like FFXIII was basically destined for a negative reaction from the western fan base with among other things, a linearity more obvious than FFX's. Earlier jRPGs might have been easily handled by western fans due to things like a world map, giving the illusion of freedom and non-linearity. I say illusion as going off the path A) fails to advance the story forward and B) is a good way to get killed if you're not careful. Remember DW/DQ1 and what happened when you crossed a bridge?

[Sord]

It'll take time for the new small companies to get going as their quirky system choices and being overshadowed by bigger games makes it difficult for them. The biggest problems for them is fan reaction as if something's too different, they will cry bloody murder. Nichier companies are able to do more as their fanbases are more understanding and don't sink as much excess resources into things like SE. This is also a problem with gaming in general: Too much escalation, even for the PC market (which is fond of doing things as to give the most expensive video card reason for existing) Sooner or later what market there is will not be able to support the increasing cost games. Nintendo while taking a more modest path, is the console company best able to spring back from a possible crash as they've been cultivating a new fanbase.

I still wouldn't underestimate the indie/small company community though. They've been steadily gaining ground, and with the push of mobile and tablet gaming they're really picking up speed. Microsoft has their whole indie network on Xbox, and they're actually encouraging a lot of things people are doing with the Kinect (which it wasn't originally intended to do.) PC indie is going strong, especially since Steam seems to back it, and then you have things like the Humble Indie Bundles and what not. It's definitely getting more attention now than it has in a very very long time (if not the most ever.)




This came up with the game killer 7, which was pretty on-rails. The Amer. gamer would be upset over the lack of freedom while the Japanese gamer would conclude the untaken paths weren't important.


I actually have that game, really liked it. Took me forever to find a damn copy, and like hell I'll be giving it up anytime soon.

[StriderTuna]

Well when the giants do collapse under their own weight, it'll be those small companies climbing over them. And even with the support indies get at the moment, they're still pretty overshadowed by the latest "Brown gritty FPS with angry bald men".

[Anon_Fire]

I want a chrono trigger remake.

FF4 got remade/ported like 12 times now?

no, FF4 was remade/ported like 8 times

SNES > PS1 > WSC > GBA > DS > Mobile > PSP

[StriderTuna]

Well I heard some of the more recent ports were due to it being FF4's anniversary.

[Akaimizu]

Well when the giants do collapse under their own weight, it'll be those small companies climbing over them. And even with the support indies get at the moment, they're still pretty overshadowed by the latest "Brown gritty FPS with angry bald men".

Kind of. But while the individual people see nice modest gains to keep going, with FPR and angry Bald men, you still have folks like Minecraft and Terraria creators, Steam indi devs, Gameloft, etc. laughing themselves to the bank.

PC gets those games, too. But they certainly aren't putting a dent in those *huge* indi-game money industry we're seeing.

They're becoming big because as indi devs, they're taking in millions to become big companies. However, how much the game cost them to create creates a huge divide where they are getting a large profit from it. Indi devs, in this day and age, are making the kind of money to be in great position to take over if big ones fall. That's the big issue, particularly what Nintendo is fighting with now. It's not because Apple has $0.99 games. It's because PCs/Macs and 360s also have such software and push from any company or little guy willing to innovate. Once Playstation allows Steam, there's a good chance it'll invade there, too. Unless Sony blocks that stuff. Nintendo is fighting the Indi Scene, when they talk about competing with cheap software. It's not just some Apple thing.

Heck. Desktop Dungeons is a big PC/Mac hit and the full game isn't even out yet.

[Sord]

FF Type-0 is out today. I nabbed the demo, it great, and I fully hope that RPGs begin pushing more in this direction with their setup. The games greatest flaw atm seems to be the camera, which is a limitation of the PSP control layout, not the game. If this was on a full controller it'd be fantastic.

http://www.pso-world.com/forums/showthread.php?t=190004
That's the offtopic thread, you can get instructions there.

[StriderTuna]

I've been hearing about that and I'm curious how many RPG elements are left in it or if they've learned from games like Crisis core or DoC

[Sord]

I've never played Crisis Core (which I kinda regret, I should track down a copy.) Your equipment load outs are more or less they same as they've always been. Armor, Accessories, etc. You can only have one magic attack per character as far as I can tell. The typical elements are all there, but there's different ways to cast them.

shotgun, short range burst with a lot of damage (AoE)
rifle, long range, powerful, straight line, single target
bomb, short range exposive (AoE on self)
missile, homing spells
rocket, magic you can charge and directly aim, AoE on impact

Characters level up. It looks like the AP meter in Dissidia is back. As you level, get more AP, you can get new and better moves that cost more AP and customize you attacks. Though that looks to be the only real thing they borrowed from Dissidia (as far as I can tell.) I still haven't gotten to a world map, though I know it exists, though not sure if it's in the demo. Demo may just be all missions. Still feeling my way through this, it's all Japanese after all and I can't read a lick of it.

You get a certain number of people in your party and can switch around between them mid combat. Dunno if co-op is in the demo, but supposedly with that you'd have multiple people running around in battles. I think it's also supposed to crank up difficulty and reward output when in co-op as well.

The missions given appear to be instanced. You're set to run along a path, and enemies spawn and you have to kill them before you can keep going down the path. Though some nice things are added, for example in the fist one there's this giant mech that eventually runs from you after you deal enough damage to it. It then hangs on to a building and just starts launching missiles at you nonstop. In order to move on you have to hide behind a truck until the missile blow it up, getting it out of your way, push forward, do it again to another truck. That ones blocking a door way, run in when the truck is gone.

Game loads into the room, mech tries to break in through the door, can't, climbs up the wall and starts shooting missiles through windows, dodge it, and it eventually stops firing and crawls away. Then you go explore the building and the mission ends when you finish doing that.

After the whole mission is said and done, you get a grade based on how well you did. Time, a variable I'm not sure of, and number of deaths play a role in the score. You get Gil based on your score, and I think maybe bonus items.