Japanese RPGs Need to Change, Says Final Fantasy Creator

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

Literally about half of that list (3/7) are done by the same guy. There are jRPG makers who do plot well, but they're few and far between.

Just like how the guys who make WRPG plots and scripts well are few and far between. Seriously, when people talk about RPGs from the West how many times are they referring to companies OTHER than Bioware or Bethesda? For every KOTOR, Dragon Age, Mass Effect, Fallout, and Elder Scrolls you have stuff like Sacred 2, Alpha Protocol, and Two Worlds.

And here, I can name a few more from the east. The Chrono series, FFs IV, VI, and VII, Xenogears, FF Tactics Advance, Front Mission 3, the Mario RPGs, Lunar, Earthbound, and Suikoden 1 and 2.

FF VII has good writing? Alpha Protocol has bad writing? What kind of Bizarro World do you live in? And as I said in my earlier posts, mediocre plots are okay if they aren't keeping gameplay systems from an era where computers couldn't handle much more than turn based fighting. If the story or gameplay are good, they can make up for the other one being mediocre, but if they're both stale, what's the point of the game?

Right, a guy saying Kawazu is a good designer is questioning MY taste. How very humorous. Yes, Alpha Protocol wasn't very well-done, something that critics and gamers agree on. And even if it HAD a good plot or writing unfortunately it was buggy as all hell and absolutely BORING to play.

I will be the first to admit that FF VII had some translation issues and some melodrama (though not as bad as many people like to claim) but overall it had interesting characters and quite a few genuine surprises that kept you on your toes. It's definitely better than the stories in a lot of RPGs I've played in the past decade.

 

[tendo82]

JRPGs definitely do emotion well, assuming maudlin describes the range of all human emotions.

JRPGs are really a matter of cultural difference. The cultural differences weren't so glaring in a time when technology only allowed pantomimes, text, and some broadly representational figures. It's for this reason that they are still widely loved on portable systems because these systems impose the limitations under which the genre works best.

I think there's also a fundamental difference in design principals that cause JRPGs not to scale well onto HD systems. American RPGs have always been rooted to simulations and strategy - the world of the PC, if you will - and JRPGs were designed as toys because the famicom was a toy.

Fast forward 20 years and we have technology capable of bringing our simulations to life - the ideal put forth by Ultima has in some sense been achieved. For the JRPG, however, it's about perfecting the idea of the perfect toy(see DQIX), but when priorities get confused and effeminate spiky haired heroes start waxing poetic about their emotions, things feel really foreign all of a sudden, in a way only the Japanophile can really love.

 

[Wolfenbarg]

And stories making no sense? Right, let's look at Fallout 3, an old friend did a "Let's Play" of it.

Spoiler

WATER!? Really? WATER. That's why the father completely abandoned the Vault, not telling anyone where he was going and blatantly disregarding the "it's fucking radioactive out there, dickweed!"..

Um, are you serious? You can't be serious with that post? I don't know if you realize it, but even in the modern world, fresh water remains possibly the most valuable limited resource on the planet. People STILL fight wars over it. Iraq is a prime example. Its value for oil is absolute piss compared to its regional significance for control of water supplies. And we're talking about a wasteland setting. You can't see the significance in that? Also, it's a carryover from the first game where the plot revolved around a desperate need for water since us human beings have a strange tendency to die of thirst. Who'd have thought?

The only thing I can say that Western RPGs do better is the whole choice dialogue options.

That's the one major thing I DESPISE in games like Fable and Mass Effect.

For example, Fable III. You can either spare or kill the mercenary gang leader, Saker. I chose to kill him (as was the supposed mission from the snow village chief, Sabine) "I want you to get rid of him." "Okay, awesome! I will do this " *kills Saker* "Oh, by the way, just so you know, if you spare him, he'll make his little gang follow you and he'll be added in the group of faded NPC's in the Road to Rule. They're cool now."

WHAT!? WHY!? He was clearly being a bastard! He was practically taunting you to KILL HIM. What kind of bullshit moral choice is that?

Mass Effect is no different. It's one of Final Fantasy X-2's MANY issues, getting 100% completion and all. Luckily, Square Enix said "Fuck that noise!" and got rid of it.

Yes, Fable 3 is a terrible example of the western role playing game and that is a great example, but then you just lump Mass Effect into the same category without saying why? Right, it's the same... because... well it's in the same sub-genre as Fable 3. Makes perfect sense. Let's neglect that it is a role playing game that allows you to not only make significant changes, but ports them over to another game for the first time since PC adventure games were the big thing.

I love JRPGs, but they really are failing to reach a wider audience because not enough of them are telling a story that most of us are in a great hurry to hear. Lost Odyssey and the last two Persona games are great examples of sparse innovation in mechanics, but huge leaps forward in storytelling and gameplay style. On the other hand, mega giant Square Enix, best known for a heavily character driven series we all know as Final Fantasy managed to push out one of the most tedious and soulless experiences I've ever suffered through to the very end. Yeah, Persona had grind, but I was always dying for the next part.

I really wish the best for The Last Story. Maybe Sakaguchi will be able to make a significant financial statement with the mantra "less is more" to define storytelling experiences. Because seriously, even films have that as a rule of thumb, cinematic games need to keep it in mind.

 

[tkioz]

I've been saying that for years, I use to be really into anime and J games, but now more and more I just can't relate to the characters, I'm sorry but how the hell am I suppose to relate to some 13 year old emo with funny hair?

 

[Vault101]

They have already westernized JRPG's too much IMO. Look what they did to Lufia II when they remade it as an action RPG for the DS, it's horrible. I like turn based combat. I'll admit that I could do without all the EMO shit but then again, I am not interested in space marines either.

I play JRPG's for the combat system, not for the characters or the story. I don't want hack n slash RPG's. Never cared for the Diablo games, Dragon Age wasn't great either.

I wouldnt call dragon age "hack and slash" since your not controlling the specifics of combat its more of an RTS with 4 party members

 

[Kroxile]

Yeah, the biggest and best change they can do for J"RPG"s is to make them into actual RPGs instead of interactive movies that involve 12 year old girls, emos, and outlandish clothing and hair styles

 

[ArchAngelKira]

I think what the FF creator says kinda makes sense. Like I've played FFXIII and other RPGs, but I liked XIII even though people keep saying it "sucked a**" or whatever. I think its nice to change thing every decade or so, FF 1-12 was fun for a while but I wouldn't want that same game with so little changed if they poped out MORE of them. I look forward to this "CHANGE" that is needed in RPGs.

 

[Lord_Nemesis]

Turn-based combat doesn't help much either.

Am I alone in think the turn-based combat system (of the older FF games, FF7 - FFX) are much better than the new systems they have been trying to introduce?

 

[PekoponTAS]

This topic has always confused me. A lot of JRPGs these days ARE quite different from the older days. Sure the plots and character stereotypes are still around, but most JRPGs I've seen lately use a pretty different combat system than older JRPGs. Sure there are a handful that stick to turn based random encounters, but that's not as often these days. JRPGs published by Atlus are usually pretty unique.

 

[darkcommanderq]

Hears the real problem with JRPGs.

The stories are terrible and incoherent. At least some of the characters are annoying, if not the whole cast, and they just dont make sense. Final fantasy gets leyway hear because its such a long running series people dont take them at face value anymore. (myself included. they are fun, things blow up, it says GREAT JOB, achievement unlocked, lets move along).

Turn based combat isnt a downfall of JRPGs, its there hallmark and its the only damn reason iv played any of them. The nice thing about turn based combat is that it allows you to fight very strategically. The newer trend of allowing you to customize the AI of your party also helps in this regard.

JRPGs should copy lost odyssey instead of the newer final fantasies because lost odyssey got TBC right. The only problem was that each 'random' encounter took like 20 minutes to resolve which was a problem. They were not hard, it was just tedious to kill the same random bloody monster 20 times while trying to solve an environment puzzle. Also once you got into it the overall story in lost odyssey was probably the best iv seen in JRPGs thus far, which is the only reason I made it to disk 4. (and then stopped because combat was taking to long...lol)

 

[MrAkuma201]

What JRPGs need is a main character that not a man child or emo ... Ya that about it.

 

[Norix596]

I think he might have taken away the wrong message from JRPG performance in the West -- I mean how much "emotion" does the Master Chief or Soap MacTavish have to display for their games to make hundreds of millions of dollars?

 

[McNinja]

They have already westernized JRPG's too much IMO. Look what they did to Lufia II when they remade it as an action RPG for the DS, it's horrible. I like turn based combat. I'll admit that I could do without all the EMO shit but then again, I am not interested in space marines either.

I play JRPG's for the combat system, not for the characters or the story. I don't want hack n slash RPG's. Never cared for the Diablo games, Dragon Age wasn't great either.

I wouldnt call dragon age "hack and slash" since your not controlling the specifics of combat its more of an RTS with 4 party members

Even worse then. A game that partially plays itself. Whereas FF 13 rightfully gets bashed for it, Dragon Age gets a free pass because it's a WRPG and it's BioWare.

Except Dragon Age let you talk to people, make decisions that literally changed the world...

The only part that Dragon Age plays itself is when you activate a move or spell, or if you've selected something and you push the button to attack it (your character will walk over to it, usually to a terrible, non-flanking spot). Have you played Dragon Age: Origins? The High Dragon at Andraste's Temple isn't an easy fight, and it's far from turn based.

On a different note, I don't like turn-based games at all, so I generally don't play anything that has a turn-based system in it. It feels so... unnatural. I mean, who waits to get attacked? I don't.

 

[Skratt]

I would love to play a JRPG - if they would just get rid of two things: turn based combat and their infinite inventories. They would also need to tone down the repetitive nature of having to fight infinite battles just to advance to the next areas safely.

I've always liked the epic stories, the characters & the environments. I like being able to combine stuff to make new gear, but new JRPG inventories are so frickin huge they don't border on the absurd, they are absurd incarnate.

So you want them to become WRPG's. Inventory management is not fun and it isn't why I play video games. Next time you see someone with a clipboard counting inventory at your local department store, ask them if they are having fun.

Dragon Age's inventory was way too low and on top of that, they didn't even include a storage chest in the main game. You have to install one at your camp separately. That's fun?

Elder Scrolls is better though still a pain. Atleast with Elder Scrolls you can increase how much you can carry by increasing your strength and you could use almost anything as a storage chest. In DA you were just screwed.

I am curious. How is an inventory that holds 99 of every item in the game worse than constantly having to drop/not pick up items because of a lack of space?

I'm sorry that you felt I was comparing WRPGs to JRPGs. I assure you I was not. This topic was about JRPGs needing to change, and I was simply agreeing with that premise with what is keeping me from playing them. I do not want a JRPG to become a WRPG, what I want (for both coincidentally) is for them to simplify their damn inventories.

For me, the more simple it is, the faster I can get back to what I love about RPGs: depth. What does that mean in terms of inventory management? It means I have a weapon, some off hand item perhaps (maybe a shield), some armor (or pieces of armor), some potions, and maybe a few extras, and I'm good to go off to the Cave of No Return to find the Item of the Ages so I can save/destroy the princess/world.

I'm even okay with a developer dropping some crap on me now and again that I can vendor the next time I am in town or just leave on the battlefield for some other hapless scavenger hero to find.

What I am not okay with is becoming a human utility belt by needing 4 swords, 2 sets of armor, 13 runes (to carry around until I find their match and combine them to make them stronger), 42 misc misc equipment and 812 combinatorial ingredients just because if I don't I might come across a monster that is immune to my flaming sword of cold and has an allergy to the refined red leaf of a ikonami tree. Seriously, W T F ?

All of it boils down to my hatred of having to obsess over the inventory or being required to pause the game during a boss fight, scroll through a giant list, ask the monster to wait just a minute more while I continue to rifle through my plethora of belongings only to realize I either (WRPG) left it in my stash back in town because I couldn't carry it or (JRPG) never bought/gathered any because I didn't know what the fuck it was or why I needed it.

I could not care less if the inventory lets me carry everything or makes me drop stuff off in a stash somewhere, because either option requires the player to suspend disbelief. The difference between rendering a WRPG character with all of their equipment and a JRPG character with all of their equipment, is that one would look like a two-legged pack mule and the other would look like a circus train, or at the very least a gypsy caravan. Both suck, both are tedious and both should be simplified.