Just what is a JRPG anyway?

Ryan Hughes

New member
Jul 10, 2012
557
0
0
So, being relatively new here, I noticed a lot of JRPG hate n the site and the forums. Of course, Yatzee, but also in posts and replies here and there. Now, I am older than most here -31 if you must know- and I remember a time when nearly all RPGs were Japanese-Developed. Sure, early Macs and PCs could run western games, but they were decidedly "Adventure" Genre games, like Deja Vu and King's Quest.

Fast forward to the current generation, and the community is pretty heavily divided on whether "Western RPGs" or "JRPGs" are better. Which I find quite odd. The discussion back in the 8, 16, and 32-bit / PC era was never about where an RPG came from, but rather whether or not it was good, or whether or not a person liked RPGs in particular.

What confuses me is that people espousing a love of "Western" RPGs and decrying "Japanese" RPGs do not really seem to understand just how similar the two sub-genres are. To me, that is like saying you love Star Wars -episode IV- but hate Japanese films, despite the fact that Star Wars is essentially a sci-fi remake of Kurosawa's "The Hidden Fortress." Really, there are far more similarities than differences, and you are welcome to prefer one over the other, but blankly disregarding the so-called "JRPG" seems a bit excessive.

Of course, all RPGs have their roots in tabletop RPGs like Dungeons and Dragons, with their extensive statistical and equipment systems, but this only shows how deeply interconnected the RPG genre is, irrespective of which side of the Pacific a game originates from.

In my opinion, the problem lies in an over-reliance on the idea of "genre," as well as an unthinking adherence to what genres people think reflect their own aesthetics. For example, in a thread asking which Final Fantasy game people liked the most, someone replied:
They all suck.

Boring Garbage Anime style pink JRPG games.
Note that no arguments about game play, story, or characters were made, but rather the poster relied entirely on a generic dismissal, with no real argument.

I do not like FPS games, nor do I care for puzzlers in general, but Portal is one of my favorite games. So, one must understand that genre itself is of little value, at best, it can only be used as a summery of the game, and at worst, it can be used solely as a marketing tool. In fact, the best games often find ways to defy genre itself -much like Portal- or to innovate the Genre to the point where it changes, like how Goldeneye and Half-Life innovated the FPS genre into something much more than it was previously.

I can certainly understand someone being turned off to the RPG genre after playing the atrocity that was Final Fantasy XIII, but there are so many wonderful RPGs, and even more games that have strong RPG elements woven into them.

So, what do you all think? Do you think it is right to divide Western RPGs and JRPGs? or, do you think we have created a false dichotomy? or, do you think that our idea of game genres is inherently flawed? Pontificate away!
 

BeeGeenie

New member
May 30, 2012
726
0
0
I don't know what the Escapist policy is regarding mention of "Extra Credits," but they recently did a very insightful series on the subject. check this action out: http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/western-japanese-rpgs-part-1

Basically, WRPGs and JRPGs are two completely seperate genres that grew out of a common foundation, but went in different directions based on differing cultural values.
 

Kahunaburger

New member
May 6, 2011
4,141
0
0
Well, let's get the Semantics Thunderdome party started!


JRPGs are the sort of RPGs they make in Japan, and WRPGs are the sort of RPGs they make in the West.
 

Kahunaburger

New member
May 6, 2011
4,141
0
0
BeeGeenie said:
http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/western-japanese-rpgs-part-1
Is that the one where they basically said ppl play RPGs to grind, mechanics are a misleading way to define genres, and that Dark Souls is a WRPG? Because lol.
 

Weaver

Overcaffeinated
Apr 28, 2008
8,977
0
0
I think they're very different; despite their common roots (and I love both).

WRPGs (which are synonymous in my mind with CRPGs) are generally about choice, dialogue and character creation. The story is what you shape it to be. JRPGs tend to be more linear with a focused story on established characters.

I don't think either is better or worse and you'll find an almost even mix in my game library. However, their similarities and common roots don't mean we should merge the genres back together, IMO.

"Drum and Bass" music and "Hardcore" (another rave sub-genre) used to be the SAME genre (that a lot of people just called "rave" back in the very early 90s and late 80s) but, besides a high BPM, are incredibly different genres in modern music. The same thing happened with RPGs. Consider them two strands of evolution with a common ancestor.

It's funny that I hear a lot of people bring up that JRPG's should just be called RPG's but have no issue keeping ARPG's separate. IMO, the "Japanese" part of JRPG is just an unfortunate naming relic that is associated with that particular kind of RPG.
 

80Maxwell08

New member
Jul 14, 2010
1,102
0
0
Yeah those extra credits videos are basically useless. For one they just downright say that an entire subgenre is better than another. Then we get into the massive factual inaccuracies in the videos. These articles say it better than I can and they are pretty long so saying everything here would be absurd.
http://radiantfantasia.blogspot.com/2012/03/rebuttal-to-extra-creditz-jrpgs-arent.html
http://radiantfantasia.blogspot.com/2012/03/responding-to-second-part-of-extra.html

Not to mention they just lump them in all together not even thinking there's anything different. Considering the differences in games from the Tales series to the Valkyrie Profile games to Kingdom Hearts to Disgaea to so many more. My opinion is that WRPG and JRPG are just useless terms. Not so much inaccurate as ineffectual.
 

Luca72

New member
Dec 6, 2011
527
0
0
You say they're more similar than they are different, but I don't think that's true.

I see some sweeping generalizations off the port bow, watch out!

When a non-RPG game has "RPG elements", that usually means experience points and customizing certain abilities as you level up. That's shared between pretty much all RPGs, be they of the W or J variant. But I don't think that's enough to say they're all radically similar.

I find JRPGs to be much more creative in their stories and environments. Many of the most popular WRPGs lately have used pretty standard (though well-defined) settings. Skyrim and Fallout are both using settings that have been done to death. However, I find it almost impossible to "role-play" in a JRPG, since the story tends to be so tightly locked in to what the developer wants to show you. I've had more fun getting lost in Skyrim than from beating most JRPGs I've played.

When JRPGs manage to come up with an original story without going batshit crazy in the process, I often prefer them to WRPGs. There are lots of WRPGs that I really enjoyed, but never finished the "main quest". I really don't have that option in a JRPG. And if the story is as engaging as something like Final Fantasy VI, I won't have any trouble finishing it.

In the last few years it seems to me like WRPGs are progressing faster than JRPGs by introducing new mechanics and methods of storytelling, while JRPGs are begin to rehash stories and just tweak battle mechanics. You can usually tell right away if a JRPG is going to be all flash and no substance, which people seem all too eager to eat up.

TLDR - A JRPG is an RPG... from Japan
 

Ryan Hughes

New member
Jul 10, 2012
557
0
0
Luca72 said:
However, I find it almost impossible to "role-play" in a JRPG, since the story tends to be so tightly locked in to what the developer wants to show you. I've had more fun getting lost in Skyrim than from beating most JRPGs I've played.
I think you touch on an important point here. In many ways, the basis of actually "Role-Playing" has been lost in many RPGs, to the point where games with full character customization like Saint's Row are more Role-Playing than most "RPGs."

The problem, I think, is not semantic, as to "how we define and RPG," but rather an over-reliance one the idea of genre itself. Back in the days of Dante -the writer not the game character- there were only two genres: Tragedy and Comedy. Tragedy meant something with a tragic ending, while comedy meant something with a happy ending. Yes, they gave away the ending in the very genre, which is why Dante's work is called "the Divine Comedy," as at the end he moves from Hell, to Purgatory, to Heaven.

Or current ideas about genre, in my opinion, make no more sense than this.

Anyway, good discussion, keep it up.
 

Kahunaburger

New member
May 6, 2011
4,141
0
0
80Maxwell08 said:
http://radiantfantasia.blogspot.com/2012/03/rebuttal-to-extra-creditz-jrpgs-arent.html
http://radiantfantasia.blogspot.com/2012/03/responding-to-second-part-of-extra.html
^This. Seriously, it still cracks me up that EC did a series of episodes on RPG taxonomy without taking 15 minutes to learn the history of RPGs.
 

Kahunaburger

New member
May 6, 2011
4,141
0
0
Ryan Hughes said:
I think you touch on an important point here. In many ways, the basis of actually "Role-Playing" has been lost in many RPGs, to the point where games with full character customization like Saint's Row are more Role-Playing than most "RPGs."
IIRC the term "role-playing game" initially meant you control one character vs. a squad or army of characters. The name got passed on to games based on D&D (and later, other P&P RPG) mechanics. I don't dispute that SRIII does the character customization thing better than, say, Mass Effect or Dark Souls, but character customization isn't the sole determinant for what we consider an RPG.
 

80Maxwell08

New member
Jul 14, 2010
1,102
0
0
Kahunaburger said:
80Maxwell08 said:
http://radiantfantasia.blogspot.com/2012/03/rebuttal-to-extra-creditz-jrpgs-arent.html
http://radiantfantasia.blogspot.com/2012/03/responding-to-second-part-of-extra.html
^This. Seriously, it still cracks me up that EC did a series of episodes on RPG taxonomy without taking 15 minutes to learn the history of RPGs.
Indeed it's what made me stop watching them as a whole. Pity considering they are supposed to be informing people.