Real Talk: How Xenoblade & Monolithsoft Saved the JRPG! - YoVideogames

[Aiddon]

The problem is JRPGs evolve at a snail's pace. I played FFVI on SNES and didn't care for it and then tried FFX on PS2 to find out in 2 generations the gameplay hasn't changed and got worse in a few places. Does any JRPG even have any kind of systemic elements yet? Like say a fire spell doing more than just "fire" damage and actually affecting the battlefield. Now a lot of JRPGs are obsessed with trying to mix and match action/real-time elements with turn-based elements and it just doesn't work.

EVERY genre evolves at a snail's pace because fundamentals don't change that much. Usually it takes some big sea change in the medium like jumping to 3D to really shake things up. It took until Resident Evil 4 for third-person-shooters to really find their mechanics and there hasn't been a big moment since. Until then it's mostly about craftmanship, whether in gameplay or storytelling.

And that's mostly where RPGs are at their strengths, using the games to explore concepts and topics. If you're seriously going to claim that stuff like Xenogears, Final Fantasy Tactics, Parasite Eve, Chrono Trigger, Vagrant Story, Threads of Fate, Front Mission, and Saga Frontier are in no way different then FFVI (whether in gameplay or narrative) then that says more about you than the genre. And that's before getting outside of Square with stuff like Tales of, Shin Megami Tensei, Etrian Odyssey, Earthbound, Xenoblade, Persona, Dark Souls, etc. Even when games were mechanically similar they tended to try and say something different through narrative whetheri t was FFVII talking about hyper capitalism and our relationship to our planet, Final Fantasy Tactics using a fantasy version of the War of the Roses to talk about how gaining power means nothing if you manipulate others to get it as you will ultimately end up alone, Xenogears using Gnostic metaphor to talk about existentialism and relationship to god, or Vagrant Story meditating on the subjectivity of memory and the lamentation of the old world. Using such broad strokes with them is nothing more than intellectual dishonesty

 

[Phoenixmgs]

EVERY genre evolves at a snail's pace because fundamentals don't change that much. Usually it takes some big sea change in the medium like jumping to 3D to really shake things up. It took until Resident Evil 4 for third-person-shooters to really find their mechanics and there hasn't been a big moment since. Until then it's mostly about craftmanship, whether in gameplay or storytelling.

And that's mostly where RPGs are at their strengths, using the games to explore concepts and topics. If you're seriously going to claim that stuff like Xenogears, Final Fantasy Tactics, Parasite Eve, Chrono Trigger, Vagrant Story, Threads of Fate, Front Mission, and Saga Frontier are in no way different then FFVI (whether in gameplay or narrative) then that says more about you than the genre. And that's before getting outside of Square with stuff like Tales of, Shin Megami Tensei, Etrian Odyssey, Earthbound, Xenoblade, Persona, Dark Souls, etc. Even when games were mechanically similar they tended to try and say something different through narrative whetheri t was FFVII talking about hyper capitalism and our relationship to our planet, Final Fantasy Tactics using a fantasy version of the War of the Roses to talk about how gaining power means nothing if you manipulate others to get it as you will ultimately end up alone, Xenogears using Gnostic metaphor to talk about existentialism and relationship to god, or Vagrant Story meditating on the subjectivity of memory and the lamentation of the old world. Using such broad strokes with them is nothing more than intellectual dishonesty

We've gone from the Syphon Filters/Winbacks to Vanquish in 2 generations in TPSs. JRPGs didn't even make a major shakeup going to 3D as literally FF10 played the same as FF6. Even FF12 is in a sense the same exact combat system, you're just allowed to automate the turns and step in when needed. How long did it take for JRPGs to give up random battles (and some still do for some reason)? That was only even a thing due to hardware limitations way way way back at the time. And everyone understands what "standard JRPG combat" is even though there are JRPGs where isn't the case. Games like Dragon Quest and new IPs like Octopath Traveler still use "standard JRPG combat". When you take positioning out of turn-based combat, you're left with very little strategy leftover and not enough of it left to merit the turn-based structure (as FF12 literally proves that with literally the same combat as a SNES game). JRPGs are always trying to make turn-based combat "fast and exciting" but you just can't do that because if you make it fast then you took out so much strategy it could just be done in real-time at that point. There's only a few games with "standard JRPG combat" that actually work like Xenosaga 2 (and people bitched because it was too slow and the 3rd game just reverted to boring ass combat). Now, a lot of JRPGs are trying to have both turn-based and action elements in the combat when they are both at odds with each other. JRPGs can succeed just fine when they choose to either be strategic (FF Tactics or Resonance of Fate) or fully action based (Dark Souls). Or, you know, RPGs don't even need a combat system at all........ Disco Elysium.

Onto the role-playing side of things, David Cage and Telltale games have more player choice with regards to characterization and story than JRPGs. Outside of JRPGs with dating sim elements, what kind of actual role-playing and story decisions do the majority of them have?

I'll ask again, is there any JRPG that has any systemic game elements in it? Look how much Breath of the Wild's systemic elements altered the moment-to-moment gameplay in that series.

 

[Dreiko]

Nah it was in all of them:


Maybe the serious scene could have worked, but having the conversation start with the character literally going "Oh wow, it's so big, and I have to put in there!?" kinda deflate any potential drama that could arise.

No I didn't mean there wasn't fanservice in the other ones, just not that sort of crystal minigame part. Those were mainly in 3 and a different take of it in Nosurge. Reivatails always get crystals inserted into them and it's always played as some sort of innuendo joke. It's one of the dozens of ways they go about finding innuendos.

You can have a lot of serious scenes and you can have a lot of pervy comedy scenes. It doesn't need to be the same scenes lol. Clearly this scene you link is one of the comedy ones. The ratio is like 35-65 comedy to serious. The series overall has a lot of lighthearted moments. It just also has a lot of dark and serious and hype ones too, which is how it's kinda supposed to be. If it's all one thing it gets boring cause these games are long. I can easily cherrypick a bunch of sad or epic moments too but spoilarz in those cases are pretty huge and I hate spoiling awesome games for folks.

 

[Aiddon]

We've gone from the Syphon Filters/Winbacks to Vanquish in 2 generations in TPSs. JRPGs didn't even make a major shakeup going to 3D as literally FF10 played the same as FF6. Even FF12 is in a sense the same exact combat system, you're just allowed to automate the turns and step in when needed. How long did it take for JRPGs to give up random battles (and some still do for some reason)? That was only even a thing due to hardware limitations way way way back at the time. And everyone understands what "standard JRPG combat" is even though there are JRPGs where isn't the case. Games like Dragon Quest and new IPs like Octopath Traveler still use "standard JRPG combat". When you take positioning out of turn-based combat, you're left with very little strategy leftover and not enough of it left to merit the turn-based structure (as FF12 literally proves that with literally the same combat as a SNES game). JRPGs are always trying to make turn-based combat "fast and exciting" but you just can't do that because if you make it fast then you took out so much strategy it could just be done in real-time at that point. There's only a few games with "standard JRPG combat" that actually work like Xenosaga 2 (and people bitched because it was too slow and the 3rd game just reverted to boring ass combat). Now, a lot of JRPGs are trying to have both turn-based and action elements in the combat when they are both at odds with each other. JRPGs can succeed just fine when they choose to either be strategic (FF Tactics or Resonance of Fate) or fully action based (Dark Souls). Or, you know, RPGs don't even need a combat system at all........ Disco Elysium.

Onto the role-playing side of things, David Cage and Telltale games have more player choice with regards to characterization and story than JRPGs. Outside of JRPGs with dating sim elements, what kind of actual role-playing and story decisions do the majority of them have?

I'll ask again, is there any JRPG that has any systemic game elements in it? Look how much Breath of the Wild's systemic elements altered the moment-to-moment gameplay in that series.

FF6 and FF10 play nothing alike; FF6 had the ATB gauge, FF10 was about thinking about which actions to use to maximize how many turns you could get and weighing risk-reward. As for when RPGs "gave up" random battles it was this: the NES era with games like Crystallis. Random battles have always been a choice and considering how long they've been around clearly it's not that much of a deal-breaker. Whining about them is like whining that a film is in black and white.

As for David Cage and Telltale Games, maybe pick better choices than a company that lost a sexual harassment lawsuit and one that is no longer around due to bad management.

 

[BrawlMan]

Onto the role-playing side of things, David Cage and Telltale games have more player choice with regards to characterization and story than JRPGs. Outside of JRPGs with dating sim elements, what kind of actual role-playing and story decisions do the majority of them have?

1. David Cage sucks ass and is not a good writer when it comes to story or characterization.
2. Most choices don't matter in Telltale game; especially if we're referring to The Walking Dead. Also, their formula got old real fast when it came to adapt other properties.

We've gone from the Syphon Filters/Winbacks to Vanquish in 2 generations in TPSs. JRPGs didn't even make a major shakeup going to 3D as literally FF10 played the same as FF6. Even FF12 is in a sense the same exact combat system, you're just allowed to automate the turns and step in when needed. How long did it take for JRPGs to give up random battles (and some still do for some reason)? That was only even a thing due to hardware limitations way way way back at the time. And everyone understands what "standard JRPG combat" is even though there are JRPGs where isn't the case. Games like Dragon Quest and new IPs like Octopath Traveler still use "standard JRPG combat". When you take positioning out of turn-based combat, you're left with very little strategy leftover and not enough of it left to merit the turn-based structure (as FF12 literally proves that with literally the same combat as a SNES game). JRPGs are always trying to make turn-based combat "fast and exciting" but you just can't do that because if you make it fast then you took out so much strategy it could just be done in real-time at that point. There's only a few games with "standard JRPG combat" that actually work like Xenosaga 2 (and people bitched because it was too slow and the 3rd game just reverted to boring ass combat). Now, a lot of JRPGs are trying to have both turn-based and action elements in the combat when they are both at odds with each other. JRPGs can succeed just fine when they choose to either be strategic (FF Tactics or Resonance of Fate) or fully action based (Dark Souls). Or, you know, RPGs don't even need a combat system at all........ Disco Elysium.

Welcome to life dude. Not everything evolves at the same rate. You can't just equate one genre to another. I don't like turn-based combat either, but definitely clicks with people and there is nothing wrong with that. There's a reason why the Persona games sell so well. With addition to style, pizzazz, and music. And you said it yourself, that jrpgs mix it up with their combat styles with varying degrees of success. And you mentioned in your examples that are tons of variety in jrpgs (or rpgs in general), so you're not exactly low on options. I've said this before, you got too strict standards for better or worse. You choose what you wanna play or don't, but just because the game does not click for you, does not mean the game itself is bad.

 

[FennecZephyr]

We've gone from the Syphon Filters/Winbacks to Vanquish in 2 generations in TPSs. JRPGs didn't even make a major shakeup going to 3D as literally FF10 played the same as FF6. Even FF12 is in a sense the same exact combat system, you're just allowed to automate the turns and step in when needed. How long did it take for JRPGs to give up random battles (and some still do for some reason)? That was only even a thing due to hardware limitations way way way back at the time. And everyone understands what "standard JRPG combat" is even though there are JRPGs where isn't the case. Games like Dragon Quest and new IPs like Octopath Traveler still use "standard JRPG combat". When you take positioning out of turn-based combat, you're left with very little strategy leftover and not enough of it left to merit the turn-based structure (as FF12 literally proves that with literally the same combat as a SNES game). JRPGs are always trying to make turn-based combat "fast and exciting" but you just can't do that because if you make it fast then you took out so much strategy it could just be done in real-time at that point. There's only a few games with "standard JRPG combat" that actually work like Xenosaga 2 (and people bitched because it was too slow and the 3rd game just reverted to boring ass combat). Now, a lot of JRPGs are trying to have both turn-based and action elements in the combat when they are both at odds with each other. JRPGs can succeed just fine when they choose to either be strategic (FF Tactics or Resonance of Fate) or fully action based (Dark Souls). Or, you know, RPGs don't even need a combat system at all........ Disco Elysium.

Onto the role-playing side of things, David Cage and Telltale games have more player choice with regards to characterization and story than JRPGs. Outside of JRPGs with dating sim elements, what kind of actual role-playing and story decisions do the majority of them have?

I'll ask again, is there any JRPG that has any systemic game elements in it? Look how much Breath of the Wild's systemic elements altered the moment-to-moment gameplay in that series.

Bruh, Resonance of Fate sucks.

The story doesn't seem to have any through-line or significant consequence and the gameplay is over-complicated with like 30 different systems and mechanics that you have to juggle if you don't want to game over constantly.

 

[meiam]

Bruh, Resonance of Fate sucks.

The story doesn't seem to have any through-line or significant consequence and the gameplay is over-complicated with like 30 different systems and mechanics that you have to juggle if you don't want to game over constantly.

That game desperately needed some sort of streamlining of the combat system, "so you can shoot at enemy, but you can also shoot while moving which is different for some reason and you can also all shoot at the same time which is also different, oh and here's your gun, it has 7 different grips, 9 scopes and 3 different magazines".

Everything sorta worked, but you could have combined most of the systems without losing any depth.

 

[FennecZephyr]

That game desperately needed some sort of streamlining of the combat system, "so you can shoot at enemy, but you can also shoot while moving which is different for some reason and you can also all shoot at the same time which is also different, oh and here's your gun, it has 7 different grips, 9 scopes and 3 different magazines".

Everything sorta worked, but you could have combined most of the systems without losing any depth.

Don't forget when you run-shoot, to do it between your party members to stock Resonance points to spend on your tri-attack so your handgunners can cash in all the scratch damage you built with your SMG.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

FF6 and FF10 play nothing alike; FF6 had the ATB gauge, FF10 was about thinking about which actions to use to maximize how many turns you could get and weighing risk-reward. As for when RPGs "gave up" random battles it was this: the NES era with games like Crystallis. Random battles have always been a choice and considering how long they've been around clearly it's not that much of a deal-breaker. Whining about them is like whining that a film is in black and white.

There's no thinking if FF10; hit the bomb enemy with ice, throw the blitzball at a flying enemy, just attack most enemies, or just have 3 mages with double-cast and kill everything. Give me gambits in FF6 or FF10 and it'll play itself just like FF12. If JRPGs "gave up" random battles during the NES era, why did FF have random battles until 12? DQ have random battles until 9? Why do new IPs like Octopath and Bravely have them? When I was looking to get into JRPGs and give them another try, it was hard trying to find ones without random battles (and that was PS2 era). All of those games are far far past the NES era. Random battles inhibit exploration and make the world seem lifeless. My tiny ass backyard is far more interesting to look at than FF10's completely barren looking Calm Lands.

As for David Cage and Telltale Games, maybe pick better choices than a company that lost a sexual harassment lawsuit and one that is no longer around due to bad management.

1. David Cage sucks ass and is not a good writer when it comes to story or characterization.
2. Most choices don't matter in Telltale game; especially if we're referring to The Walking Dead. Also, their formula got old real fast when it came to adapt other properties.

I don't care how much or how little David Cage or Telltale games are liked or disliked. Name me some JRPGs with more role-playing in them than adventure games. You know that the RP in JRPG stands for role-playing, right? I don't think it's a big ask to get role-playing from a role-playing game.

Welcome to life dude. Not everything evolves at the same rate. You can't just equate one genre to another. I don't like turn-based combat either, but definitely clicks with people and there is nothing wrong with that. There's a reason why the Persona games sell so well. With addition to style, pizzazz, and music. And you said it yourself, that jrpgs mix it up with their combat styles with varying degrees of success. And you mentioned in your examples that are tons of variety in jrpgs (or rpgs in general), so you're not exactly low on options. I've said this before, you got too strict standards for better or worse. You choose what you wanna play or don't, but just because the game does not click for you, does not mean the game itself is bad.

Going from SNES to PS2, there should be some damn evolution. RPGs are such an open-ended genre that anything is possible in them; they are literally not tied to any single gameplay mechanic like a 1st/3rd-person shooter; in fact, an RPG can be a 1st/3rd-person shooter. Yet JRPGs stuck their feet in the ground sticking with many gameplay mechanics that were antiquated generations ago.

There's nothing wrong with good turn-based combat. XCOM literally uses pretty much basic DnD combat (you have a move action and attack action) to this day. It works still because you have to think you're way through each battle, it doesn't work in real-time. Whereas FF12 shows that any previous FF game (sans Tactics) works in real-time because it's so basic, you can automate it. There's a few JRPGs that actually do interesting things but those are so few and far between and most of them that you see are still doing things from the NES/SNES era. I gave the example of Xenosaga 2's battle system being interesting and fans bitched it wasn't "JRPG enough" so the battle system in the 3rd game just went back to "standard JRPG combat". Why isn't there a JRPG with any systemic elements? Like use a fire spell to actually set an enemy on fire (or the land) and take burn damage each turn or put ice on the ground causing enemies to slip and fall.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

Bruh, Resonance of Fate sucks.

The story doesn't seem to have any through-line or significant consequence and the gameplay is over-complicated with like 30 different systems and mechanics that you have to juggle if you don't want to game over constantly.

That game desperately needed some sort of streamlining of the combat system, "so you can shoot at enemy, but you can also shoot while moving which is different for some reason and you can also all shoot at the same time which is also different, oh and here's your gun, it has 7 different grips, 9 scopes and 3 different magazines".

Everything sorta worked, but you could have combined most of the systems without losing any depth.

Resonance of Fate's battle system is pretty awesome. It has its shortcomings with only literally 2 strategies that you ever need to use and the fact that enemies don't utilize the system themselves so you don't have to plan for them doing much strategy at all. The combat system is pretty simple, it's just sorta hard to explain. The game's reviews are kinda hilarious with most reviewers saying the game is hard. You really just do your "hero" moves (if I recall the name correctly) in a certain way to be able to do that triangular attack thing at some point. All the extraneous stuff you can do like knocking enemies up and then hitting them down to get more loot is more fun than it is in any way required (the animations are so awesome). And, your building of guns is pretty simple to understand as well, it's far more humorous looking than anything (you're really just stacking bonuses and min/maxing like a lot of RPGs). The game's overarching plot is rather lacking, you have read wikis to actually understand it, but the what I loved about the story and characters (which is the vast majority of story) is that it was kinda akin to Firefly where you were just doing various jobs to make a living and I liked the characters a lot and they weren't annoying. There's was no collect 6 crystals to save the world against some god that has 20 transformations or whatnot. I got the Platinum trophy for Resonance of Fate actually so I know like everything about the game. I'll take like a game like Resonance of Fate over an Octopath Traveler any day of the week.

 

[BrawlMan]

Going from SNES to PS2, there should be some damn evolution. RPGs are such an open-ended genre that anything is possible in them; they are literally not tied to any single gameplay mechanic like a 1st/3rd-person shooter; in fact, an RPG can be a 1st/3rd-person shooter. Yet JRPGs stuck their feet in the ground sticking with many gameplay mechanics that were antiquated generations ago.

Welp, your expectations are set way too high dude.Then again,I wasn't that big in to rpgs. Cuz their people who love the jrpg turn based combat. I don't know what else to tell you. Like I said before, you ain't low on options, and I feel you're making to big a deal about it.

I gave the example of Xenosaga 2's battle system being interesting and fans bitched it wasn't "JRPG enough" so the battle system in the 3rd game just went back to "standard JRPG combat".

You can blame that one on the fans. You know how some people are: ***** when things are different and want the same thing. There are people who don't know what the hell they want.

Why isn't there a JRPG with any systemic elements? Like use a fire spell to actually set an enemy on fire (or the land) and take burn damage each turn or put ice on the ground causing enemies to slip and fall.

Aside from the Japanese being usually more traditional; I don't know, really don't care. You're better off asking them that.

I don't care how much or how little David Cage or Telltale games are liked or disliked. Name me some JRPGs with more role-playing in them than adventure games. You know that the RP in JRPG stands for role-playing, right? I don't think it's a big ask to get role-playing from a role-playing game.

Genres do change over the years. No need to be literal minded. Okay sure, Telltale games have better stories than say most of the crap Square put out today (FFXIII & XV), but that's only by comparison. David Cage sucks at the role-playing, and despite all of the "role playing" a Telltale game has, your choices don't matter in the end. Once again, not the RPG expert, but I would happily take Parasite Eve, and most of the RPGs on PS1/2/3/4 over the crap Cage and Telltale made. Especially Parasite Eve. If there is any action jrpg that deserves a reboot/remake is that one.

 

[Aiddon]

I don't care how much or how little David Cage or Telltale games are liked or disliked. Name me some JRPGs with more role-playing in them than adventure games. You know that the RP in JRPG stands for role-playing, right? I don't think it's a big ask to get role-playing from a role-playing game.

Doesn't matter how much "role-playing" Cage puts into his work (he actually doesn't) considering his stories are terribly written and he's a massive creep. Then again, it's also funny how you reduce things solely to mechanical thinking instead of narrative or theme. Which shows you're not actually interested in the most important part of RPGs: storytelling. Which means you don't actually care about content, just mechanics. Which means this conversation is done. Japanese RPGs are just as relevant and thematically and mechanically rich as their Western counterparts and nothing can do will ever change that. If you can't get over that, that's a problem with you being an intellectual bigot who is gatekeeping, not the genre and trying to say otherwise is just childish.

 

[FennecZephyr]

There's no thinking if FF10; hit the bomb enemy with ice, throw the blitzball at a flying enemy, just attack most enemies, or just have 3 mages with double-cast and kill everything. Give me gambits in FF6 or FF10 and it'll play itself just like FF12. If JRPGs "gave up" random battles during the NES era, why did FF have random battles until 12? DQ have random battles until 9? Why do new IPs like Octopath and Bravely have them? When I was looking to get into JRPGs and give them another try, it was hard trying to find ones without random battles (and that was PS2 era). All of those games are far far past the NES era. Random battles inhibit exploration and make the world seem lifeless. My tiny ass backyard is far more interesting to look at than FF10's completely barren looking Calm Lands.



I don't care how much or how little David Cage or Telltale games are liked or disliked. Name me some JRPGs with more role-playing in them than adventure games. You know that the RP in JRPG stands for role-playing, right? I don't think it's a big ask to get role-playing from a role-playing game.


Going from SNES to PS2, there should be some damn evolution. RPGs are such an open-ended genre that anything is possible in them; they are literally not tied to any single gameplay mechanic like a 1st/3rd-person shooter; in fact, an RPG can be a 1st/3rd-person shooter. Yet JRPGs stuck their feet in the ground sticking with many gameplay mechanics that were antiquated generations ago.

There's nothing wrong with good turn-based combat. XCOM literally uses pretty much basic DnD combat (you have a move action and attack action) to this day. It works still because you have to think you're way through each battle, it doesn't work in real-time. Whereas FF12 shows that any previous FF game (sans Tactics) works in real-time because it's so basic, you can automate it. There's a few JRPGs that actually do interesting things but those are so few and far between and most of them that you see are still doing things from the NES/SNES era. I gave the example of Xenosaga 2's battle system being interesting and fans bitched it wasn't "JRPG enough" so the battle system in the 3rd game just went back to "standard JRPG combat". Why isn't there a JRPG with any systemic elements? Like use a fire spell to actually set an enemy on fire (or the land) and take burn damage each turn or put ice on the ground causing enemies to slip and fall.

Okay, we get it, you hate JRPGS. Why don't you stop complaining about them and leave the genre to people who actually enjoy the games as they are?

 

[Dreiko]

So, the role playing in Jrpgs is different from Wrpgs or DnD or what have you.


In the traditional western stuff, you self-insert. You are free to make choices for most things and you get to make the character be how you want them to be.


In Jrpgs most of the time what you role play as is a particular already-defined character. You often have some dialogue options here and there but the character's personality is set in stone. The difference here is that the character you're playing as behaves in a way that is more harmonious to the overall game, making for a more interesting plot. Whereas if you self-insert and do whatever that comes to your mind the coherence of the plot will be much lowered as will be the impact of events because when everything is tightly orchestrated to work out just right by talented developers it is much more interesting.


A prime example is The Outer Worlds which I'm playing right now. Game has a lot of freedom, tons of interesting systems and interactions and choices. Ultimately though, it's less than the sum of its parts. Part of it is just the design of the world and the characters just being lame for a lack of a better term. It's very funny and smart but not really cool or hype or epic at all. Hell, I find myself missing Skyrim of all things sometimes when I play that game (which is not a sentiment I've seen expressed much, all I heard was how the game basically made bethesda obsolete), cause while a lot of issues Bethesda generally has are fixed, those are never really the big things, just a lot of really small minor things that are bad but not important.


Ultimately it's about what you want out of a game. If you want a dozen different way for a boring dialogue sequence to end, all of which are notably different and differently boring, that's cool. I prefer for something to happen in a cool or epic way, even if it's more linear. I think a great balance is Divinity Original Sin 2 where you can play as a completely self insert char or as someone with a history. Sometimes that history even gives you unique dialogue lines and those actually feel the most compelling.

 

[sXeth]

I wouldn't say JRPG's ever really died, or even went heavily downhill?


OF course, as AAA and Western Gamers goes, JRPG = Final Fantasy (and being generous, maybe Squares other SNES output), and that definitely took a nosedive.


Other then that, I'd say its remained about the same ss ever. Which is a mid-tier niche genre, but a stable one.

 

[fOx]

Doesn't matter how much "role-playing" Cage puts into his work (he actually doesn't) considering his stories are terribly written and he's a massive creep. Then again, it's also funny how you reduce things solely to mechanical thinking instead of narrative or theme. Which shows you're not actually interested in the most important part of RPGs: storytelling. Which means you don't actually care about content, just mechanics. Which means this conversation is done. Japanese RPGs are just as relevant and thematically and mechanically rich as their Western counterparts and nothing can do will ever change that. If you can't get over that, that's a problem with you being and intellectual bigot who is gatekeeping, not the genre and trying to say otherwise is just childish.

You know, even from a storytelling perspective, JRPG's have never really risen above the level of writing seen in anime and manga. It's mostly very over the top, surface level storytelling that acts as icing for a genre that is very mechanics focused.

Which is fine, but I think western developers are far more concerned with storytelling in games. Has any Japanese game ever reached the heights of storytelling captured in Baldurs Gate or Myst? The emotion of The Last of Us? The subtleties of Paratropic?

Some have tried. Dark Soul's and Silent Hill probably come closest, but I don't think it's a coincidence that they're heavily inspired by western storytelling. Earthbound was an interesting experiment, but it has since been overshadowed by Lisa the Painful, Off, and even Undertale. When looking for serious, mature, thematic storytelling for adults, I don't think JRPG's are a very fruitful genre to examine.

 

[CriticalGaming]

You know, even from a storytelling perspective, JRPG's have never really risen above the level of writing seen in anime and manga. It's mostly very over the top, surface level storytelling that acts as icing for a genre that is very mechanics focused.

Which is fine, but I think western developers are far more concerned with storytelling in games. Has any Japanese game ever reached the heights of storytelling captured in Baldurs Gate or Myst? The emotion of The Last of Us? The subtleties of Paratropic?

Some have tried. Dark Soul's and Silent Hill probably come closest, but I don't think it's a coincidence that they're heavily inspired by western storytelling. Earthbound was an interesting experiment, but it has since been overshadowed by Lisa the Painful, Off, and even Undertale. When looking for serious, mature, thematic storytelling for adults, I don't think JRPG's are a very fruitful genre to examine.

That's a cultural difference though. Japanese written stuff isn't going to resonate to Westerner's (even Anime fans) the same way that Western stories will because there is a completely different cultural structure that people relate too. So you can't directly compare that Japanese writing never has the same impact, because you don't know how the core market (which is always the Japanese market) relates to it.

Do you think they herald God of War, or Last of Us, or whatever the same way in Japan? Probably not.

Japanese fiction tends to lean towards the comical or wild crazy fantasy stuff because their culture is so fucking reserved that they used their fiction to let their minds free in a lot of ways. Thus you see so much goofy shit in even serious stories like the Yakuza games and what not.

 

[SupahEwok]

Japanese fiction tends to lean towards the comical or wild crazy fantasy stuff because their culture is so fucking reserved that they used their fiction to let their minds free in a lot of ways. Thus you see so much goofy shit in even serious stories like the Yakuza games and what not.

That's an impression that someone only familiar with manga, light novels, anime, and games would have, ignoring that the majority of that output is aimed at children or manchildren. It completely ignores their literature and arts, of which they have as high and vibrant a culture as anywhere else.

 

[fOx]

That's a cultural difference though. Japanese written stuff isn't going to resonate to Westerner's (even Anime fans) the same way that Western stories will because there is a completely different cultural structure that people relate too. So you can't directly compare that Japanese writing never has the same impact, because you don't know how the core market (which is always the Japanese market) relates to it.

Do you think they herald God of War, or Last of Us, or whatever the same way in Japan? Probably not.

Japanese fiction tends to lean towards the comical or wild crazy fantasy stuff because their culture is so fucking reserved that they used their fiction to let their minds free in a lot of ways. Thus you see so much goofy shit in even serious stories like the Yakuza games and what not.

It's not an issue of cultural difference. JRPG's and anime, in general, are just woefully inferior to other forms of media in terms of storytelling. And, I think, Japanese games as a whole are as well.

I acknowledge the tremendous skill of serious japanese artists. Akira Kurosawa, Kobayashi Issa, Hiroshi Yoshida, ect.

 

[Dreiko]

It's not an issue of cultural difference. JRPG's and anime, in general, are just woefully inferior to other forms of media in terms of storytelling. And, I think, Japanese games as a whole are as well.

I acknowledge the tremendous skill of serious japanese artists. Akira Kurosawa, Kobayashi Issa, Hiroshi Yoshida, ect.

This is really amusing for me to read.

Most other forms of media storytelling paled in comparison, in my experience. Growing up I hated most of that sort of books that others held in high regard. Same with most movies too. They never did it for me. Always loved anime and Jrpg storytelling though.

In more modern times, I have found aspects of anime being adopted in westerner media, a prominent example being the character Syl from the Stormlight Archive, which in my head is basically an anime character when I picture her actions.

Simply put, I never really cared about all that other sort of storytelling, and only by it adopting anime and Jrpg components has it managed to belatedly garner some interest in me.

I ultimately find that this notion of "serious" (vs I guess non-serious?) artist is a BS one, conjured up by gatekeeping assholes who enjoy smelling their own farts and need to feel superior to you by pretending that the things that move your soul aren't art as much as the things they claim to like, despite doing just that thing which art most needs to do for you; be compelling. If something giving you shivering goosebumps and making you tear up with excitement is not "serious" then such a label is absolutely trash. (and yes, I am referring to the effects of digimon adventure 2 on a younger me here, not even a mid tier anime really lol, the last of us never got me feeling anything nearly as strong, for example)


I think this is the climate that lead me to just genuinely hate reading for the first 20 or so years of my life, only to get into it later in life due to being open-minded enough to actually try things that seem different and weird and not all that interesting on a first glance. Also a lot of anime came from books and not just Manga so that helped a ton too. Spice and Wolf is excellent to read. Anime was awesome too of course but the books have a ton more stuff going for em.