JRPG don't need to be WRPG. *Read post, before posting*

[seditary]

There is no such thing as electronic gaming RPGs. The most advancement towards an RPG is what I term CPGs, Character Playing Games where the player gets to create and play a character in arbitrary limited circumstances.

I just have no idea why people bag out what they term JRPGs and say they should become more like what they think are WRPGs since that's like saying Halo is crap cause its not enough like Starcraft.

If you like them then great, have fun, if you don't then great, there's plenty of other stuff out there.

 

[Crossborder]

I agree completely. I love RPG's in general, but I can't stand the general japanese style of most JRPG's. But that's fine, you know?
There are plenty of gamers who do enjoy them. They are a unique thing, only bonded by the fact they share the name RPG.
If everyone in the RPG genre wants to make the same game, you get the ''brown and bloom syndrome'' most FPS's share.
The difference between JRPG's and WRPG's is a great thing, and should by no means ever be removed.

 

[Keava]

Hell no.
Im happy with jRPGs being exactly how they are now. This way i don't even have to ponder about buying one, because i know exactly what i will get and thus i can avoid it easily. Personally i find them very poor in terms of gameplay, writing and characters, they are dull and predictable plus i hate the art direction. I don't want the market to be flooded with quasi-western RPGs in which every character is an emo teenager with spiky hair or a squeaky lolita with daddy's syndrome.

You like jRPGs, good for you, just keep them away from me and we can happily co-exist on a single planet.

 

[tillotson11]

Well JRPGs are different from what most westerners consider RPGs because it comes from a different culture. In Japan there is an entirely seperate genre or "interactive stories" which is a just a video book. This has carried over into their RPGs because that's part of their gamer culture. Contrary to this most WRPGs developed from D&D, which revolved around the player choosing the story, not the creator. Comparing JRPGs and WRPGs doesn't really get you anywhere cause they're different sub-genres, evolved from different play-styles.

 

[Crimson_Dragoon]

No, of course they shouldn't become more like WRPGs. Sure, a little gameplay innovation wouldn't hurt, but they don't need branching stories or character creation. Everyone derides JRPGs for linear storytelling, but having a directed story with consistent characters means a better-told central storyline, which is what JRPGs are best at and where WRPGs are weak. Let's face it, Fallout 3's main storyline was a sidequest that originally ended the game when you beat it and the last few Bioware games (despite having great settings and characters) have been very lackluster when it comes to a main story. That's a disadvantage of giving story and character control to the player (where the story somehow has to take into account all player choices and actions), and its not a bad thing that JRPGs don't do this.

 

[DustyDrB]

Bioware games are usually linear. You have mission 1 followed by Mission 2A-2F (complete those in any order) then Mission then mission 4A-4F and so on. I love linearity. Linearity isn't why I don't like JRPGs. That just has more to do with the combat, storytelling, characterization, and art style (pretty much all the same reasons I have for not liking Fallout 3, by the way). And I'm not saying JRPGs are "bad", just that I don't like them. I think that's what a lot of people here are saying.

 

[pirate64]

Nothing wrong with JRPGs. also nothing wrong with WRPGs. The way I see it they have diffrent styles but I don't think one is better than the other.

On the one hand you have JRPGs. These mostly focus on a linear story. The is nothing wrong with this as they (mostly in my opinion) have a better story than WRPGs because of this. This is because the problem with letting the player have a say in how the story plays out means that diffrent paths of the story have to be made. This gives the player feel like the story is based around them (because it is) but also means that (most of the time. again in my opinion) the story can not be as filled out a detailed as a linear story.

Next is gameplay. WRPGs now seem to mostly be action orientated involing the player to shoot or slash their way though the game and using stats to give them a boost. In JRPGs they are (mostly) more about commaneding your charaters in e.g. turn based combat. In these stats play a bigger part than in WRPGs as your "troops" don't have the help of your action skills and reliey on their stats to fight.

I don't think you can really compare JRPGs and WRPGs as they both have diffrent types of story telling and gameplay. it woul;d be like trying to compare FPSs to RTSs.

I agree that JRPGs can be very samey but that more about lazy devs not the genre and the always are the good ones (these are what I consider good JRPGs you don't have to argee) e.g. start ocean, valkyria chorns.

WRPGs also have their flaws. e.g. badly though out ideas, bad story continuity. But again then you have the good ones e.g. mass effect, fallout, ect.

so in answer to the OP. No. JRPGs shouldn't become like WRPGs because then we'd lose a rich and large genre of games. It would be like turning all TPS in FPS, we'd miss out on things that only that genre can do.

Also I'd like to point out that I play both JRPGs and WRPGs. I'm playing valkyria chrons 2 on my psp and just pre-ordered fallout new vegas colectors (I just wanted to say that cus I'm happy about it lol)

 

[Negatempest]

My problem with JRPG's was never the story, linearity or lack of player choice. It was the god awful choice to stick with turn-based attacks for decades. Kingdom Hearts was a HUGE, HUGE!!!! step in being both a great story, linearity, no player choice BUT removed turned based combat. Than FFXIII came out and watching the protagonist take extremely slow, but devastating hits just doesn't make any sense by the standards today. Don't we now have the technology today, unlike the NES/SNES days, to move our character out of harms way if a huge but slow AoE is coming?

We don't want to go back to the days where we have a set amount of lives and continues to complete a game (think about playing R.E. like that considering the many cheap deaths) why should we stick with a dated method of waiting for a 5 turn AoE based attack and just take it in the face like our characters think they are Rambo....OMG how I hate turn based combat now.

 

[Legion IV]

When were they ever stale? I still love my jrpgs. WRPGS are stale. Yes theres a brancing path oh therea a conversation please choose to be a dick a nice guy or neutrul. i love my jrpgs. Its impossible for a WRPG to be really engrossing because theres so many diffrent choices. hell people reloaded mass effect 2 to save everyone. Evertyhing feels so loose.

 

[Space Spoons]

In my opinion, the best kind of JRPG is the kind of JRPG that every JRPG hater fears the most. Turned-based combat, no voice acting, a linear (but well written) story, a leveling system that makes sense, and an ensemble cast with no clear-cut lead. I hate this recent trend of trying to "westernize" JRPGs. Honestly, I could not care less about "innovation" or whatever they're calling it these days.

 

[Negatempest]

Oh, Chrono Trigger. A great JRPG with hints of Wrpg without being a Wrpg. Such an awesome game, even had turn-based combat and I loved it MORE than FF. But the last boss fight....30 freaking minutes....wow...and that was me literally healing everyone to max and throwing everything AND the kitchen sink at him for 30 minutes....

 

[Savagezion]

I agree that JRPGs can be very samey but that more about lazy devs not the genre and the always are the good ones (these are what I consider good JRPGs you don't have to argee) e.g. start ocean, valkyria chorns.

WRPGs also have their flaws. e.g. badly though out ideas, bad story continuity. But again then you have the good ones e.g. mass effect, fallout, ect.

I would say that both W&JRPGs suffer from all of these faults. WRPGs can also feel "samey". But just as many JRPGs suffer from poorly thought out ideas and bad story continuity as WRPGs do. JPRGs invented and have since had a knack for turning you into everybody's favorite kleptomaniac. You run all around the world breaking into everyone's houses and stealing all their stuff to have them watch you and praise you for it. It kills the immersion for me personally doing things like this. It is like trying to play an "evil John Marston". It just doesn't work and the game comes off as bi-polar.

I don't have anything against someone liking JRPGs but the "story is better and more consistant" as a counter arguement to lack of choice is just a bogus arguement. I have a hard time giving JRPGs a free pass on story but WRPGs get scrutanized over small details. If we hold everything up to the same standards, neither comes out on top storywise outside of preference of what you are and are not willing to overlook. Usually someone will prefer one style over the other but it is NOT a difference of "Epic vs. Drivel" stroytelling as some people make it out to be.

 

[Hijax]

Of course they shouldn't become more like WRPGs. Thats what WRPGs are FOR, you know. They should do something new, because the genre is starting to stand still almost as much as FPS, but the change should be something new, not just becoming mor like WRPGs.

 

[Savagezion]

When were they ever stale? I still love my jrpgs. WRPGS are stale. Yes theres a brancing path oh therea a conversation please choose to be a dick a nice guy or neutrul. i love my jrpgs. Its impossible for a WRPG to be really engrossing because theres so many diffrent choices. hell people reloaded mass effect 2 to save everyone. Evertyhing feels so loose.

I forgot to bring this up but since you have I will expand. I think this is the problem alot of people have with WRPGs. I didn't reload. I love the linear side of Bioware's storytelling and Bethesda I am not a fan of. I don't need to see every result, nor find every little thing. However, JRPGs stress this. Alot of times you as the player have no idea what you are "supposed to do" in a JRPG so you have to run through a checklist of things that might trigger the story to continue. Really the whole feel of most JRPGs encourage the player to do everything.

There are things in Mass Effect I haven't seen and I may never see. And I like that. Because a year from now I might decide to roll up a new charactor and play again and I might get to play it again for the first time all over again... in a sense. I think alot of JRPG fans have a hard time not "saying everything" and "looking everywhere" as opposed to actually trying to just play the charactor.

 

[Iron Lightning]

RPG = role-playing game, not stat-building game. JRPGs, while they can be worthwhile in their own way, are not RPGs. If your actions have no impact on the story, then you are simply not playing an RPG. The term JRPG is not the proper term for the genre. Turn-Based Adventure Game is a much better discriptor of the genre. An RPG does not need visible stats to be an RPG. A game could have no stats whatsoever, be based around choices, and still be an RPG.

To better answer the OP's question: Yes, JRPGs can't be WRPGs because JRPGs are not RPGs in the first place, and that's okay.

 

[Baby Tea]

The thing is, JRPGs have been getting quite stale. I like them myself, but since I never owned a platform with too many of them, they never managed to get boring for me. However, for the general audience, JRPGs need something new.

That's just it!
WRPGs were once pretty linear, and have expanded, chagned, evolved.
JRPGs have been largely unchanged since FF1.

It's a bit of an oversimplification, but think about it: You'll get new battle mechanics, but that's hardly evolving. You've still got the big travel map, the local travel map, and the battle map. Random battles, turn-based fights, linear worlds and stories...where is the evolution here?

I'll admit I'm not a JRPG guy, and I'll be first in line to say that fans of JRPGs are more then entitled to play the games they like. IF JRPG fans like it, then that's fine. I'm obviously not the target market. I've tried more then my fair share, and I didn't like any of them, except Eternal Sonata! And that was only for the battle system. The story and characters were terrible. I pushed myself to finish it.

 

[archvile93]

No JRPGs shouldn't just becom WRPG clones, but they should take a few tactics from the latters' playbook. Less emos, more sensical plots and more characters that dress like they aren't blind and retarded would be a good start.

Edit: It would also be nice if the characters looked and acted like they have the sklls and equipment necessary to defeat their enemies. IE, don't have the four foot tall guy whose been consistently shown to be a sniviling coward pull out a giant chain gun and kill the thousand foot tall chtulu (or however you spell that) type monster of the week. If your going to have a character do that make him look and act like he could.

 

[Akihiko]

JRPGs have about as much evolution as any genre currently our there in all honesty. You'll be pushed to find an JRPG released in the past few which still uses the old style turn-based combat and random battles outside an handheld console. The only exceptions I can think of are Persona 4 and Lost Odyssey. Shooters are still generally the same as they were 10 years ago, cover was added and a few other minor things. Sports games have hardly changed either. Even WRPG's if I'm honest, outside Mass Effect, which one can argue is an WRPG TPS hybrid (Which admittedly is an interesting experiment but it is more mixing genres rather than adding something entirely new), have only evolved as much as JRPGs have in the past 10 years too. After all Baldur's gate had choice too and the gameplay is fairly similar, other than the technical improvements over the years, which can be said for every genre.

My point? Pretty much most genres are in stagnation at the moment. The difference between Mario, Starcraft, WRPGs and JRPGs? The former 3 appeal to the western audience more, so they complain less about the genre being in stagnation because they don't mind it as they enjoy the general formula to begin with. I guess it boils down to since games cost much more to produce now, it's harder to devote so much money into something other than a formula they know will sell well. At least that was my take on the situation.

Now as for the original subject. I enjoy WRPGs and JRPGs for their own reasons. I'd hate to see all JRPGs becoming WRPG's, it's boring if all games follow the same suit. Although I can see it happening considering the japanese developers are wanting to appeal more to the western audience. JRPGs need to expand in their own way. Problem is, people moan if they do try and change things, like what happened with both FF12 and FF13. Which does bring up another point. How can JRPGs change that much if half the fans of them don't want them to change? Same can be said for every genre. You can't please everyone unfortunately.

 

[pirate64]

I don't have anything against someone liking JRPGs but the "story is better and more consistant" as a counter arguement to lack of choice is just a bogus arguement. I have a hard time giving JRPGs a free pass on story but WRPGs get scrutanized over small details. If we hold everything up to the same standards, neither comes out on top storywise outside of preference of what you are and are not willing to overlook. Usually someone will prefer one style over the other but it is NOT a difference of "Epic vs. Drivel" stroytelling as some people make it out to be.

Hm I see what your saying and I agree to most of it. I think I may have badly writen the part about the diffrence in story telling. I meant more along the lines of that if the story is linear then It allows the devs to write the story as a whole complete story where as in a WRPG they have a basic story but the needs to be multiple paths meaning they have less time to prefect the stroy. I'm not saying that all JRPGs have better storys (as some I've played have had extremly bad ones) and I'm also not saying that WRPGs can't have very good storys.

 

[Soviet Heavy]

My belief concerning the problem with JRPGs stems much from the same source of my consternation with the Japanese entertainment industry as a whole: quantity.

There is simply too much stuff coming out, and it all looks the same to me. Of course, as a broad term this would be like saying Studio Ghibli is the same as Funimation or what have you, but you get my meaning.

The standard tropes apply to the majority of JRPGs, and if you don't like the setup of one game, you're not likely going to like many others unless you do some digging.

One of the appealing factors concerning WRPGs is that the emphasis on quantity is toned down considerably. There are far fewer WRPGs coming out each year than there are JRPGs. This also helps categorize them a little more.

Story Driven? Bioware or Obsidian have got you covered.
Expansive and Explorative? You've got Fallout.
Action-y? Try the Witcher or Fable.

People like when they know what they're getting out of a game. So if the games are more easily categorized, it is easier to choose what they want to play.

So like I said, if a person is not too keen on one JRPG, then don't expect them to come back to another one if it is just the same experience. People will play what they like, and nobody can change that except themselves.