These forums have some serious issues with JRPGs. And it's time to address them.

[Onyx Oblivion]

1. Female looking men.

I, honestly, can't see what people have against this.

Hey, I can't see it, either.

Also, I liked Tidus.

But

Spoiler: people are strange

.

 

[TheDoctor455]

On the contrary, RPGs are supposed to be about role playing. Calling a level up system an ''RPG element'' is ignorance. Common ignorance, but ignorance none the less.

Exactly.

You see Onyx, the thing about leveling systems and stat tracking is that they are not exclusive to the RPG formula anymore (they used to be), so they can't really be said to define an RPG. And I'm not saying that every choice you make in an RPG as to be a moral quandary, but I do feel that every choice in the game has to have some kind of consequence for the game world or you personally. Which leads me to another problem I have with most JRPGS: the inability to create your own character. Yes, while this does generally mean that the main character would have voice acting, this also means that his/her personality is set in stone, and all your doing is taking over for the combat. For an RPG to truly be called an RPG, and this goes back to DND, it has to allow you to define your character's personality through in-game actions.

 

[Woem]

I dislike them for their Turn Based combt, while that's not all RPGs, It's most of them.

Why don't you dislike turn-based combat in an RPG?

This is what I don't understand about the JRPG hate, people who think turn-based combat is bad for RPGs.

Also note that the classic WRPGs like Baldur's Gate and Arcanum are also turn-based, and many people love those.

 

[Bobzer77]

I blame Bioware for popularizing this idea. WRPGs didn't always have moral choice. They used to be purely about leveling and stats.

Purely leveling and stats aren't what an RPG is.

See Diablo.

Diablo is not an RPG. It is an action adventure game.

Hmm...interesting. Most people would call it an RPG, but that actually is more correct. Minus the adventure part. Adventuring involves exploring and puzzles, and Diablo's random dungeon layout can't really be "explored" since its all random.

Well you could also argue that because it's random your exploring something diffrent every time ; )

 

[Sexy Street]

I think that a lot of people don't like them because of this man:

Not all Japanese people are like that.

It's like thinking that all shooters are by CliffyB.

Who the fuck is that strange strange man, and why do I feel the need to get a gun?

 

[Dragon Zero]

Some of it I think just comes from the few very bad ones, whether due to bad acting, dialogue, combat, stories, or maybe just a little too much grinding. The thing about JRPGs I hate the most is random encounters, it just seems so lazy when a game is 50+ hours yet 46+ of them is trying to reach a save point because dinner's ready and your dads yelling and you keep getting the psycho ***** monster that takes fifty goddamn turns to get to half health and... wow I really need to let this go before I burst a capillary. My point is that, like other genres, people start with bad ones and give up before they find the good ones.

I'll admit that I'm not really the biggest fan but I'll still play at least two series Kingdom Hearts and the Mario RPGs. Other than that I've really grown out of it though I might play that copy of Lost Odyssey I have. My older bro told me to play it, he really likes it but I've heard mixed things and I'm not sure, is it any good? Also my friend tells me Ar Tinelico, or however you spell it, is supposed to be good but I recon few here have heard of it even.

If you're curious as to why I no longer favor the genre (which I'm willing to bet you're not but you got me started so don't hate me for it) blame two games. The first is Star Ocean Till the End of Time, a game I couldn't navigate even with a map, GPS, strategy guide and the games creator pointing at the screen and shouting "Go there idiot!"

The other is *shudder* this...

Spoiler

...An unholy abomination representing everything I hate about the genre and even some new things to hate. Terrible story, Characters that seem like they were created more as dares as to see how much cliche you could stuff into a disc before it exploded, dialogue that is either all in text or with voices that make you shove a pencil in your ears, big worlds condensed into linear corridors, soundtrack consisting of the same five notes recycled, overly long cinematics, promising combat let down by too many factors, and finally fucking RANDOM ENCOUNTERS!

I'm sorry, I went on longer than needed. I guess I'm just cranky because I've yet to have a Dr Pepper today. Anyway, other than those two games, I encourage people to play JRPGs, and see how they like them. I shall return when I've had the proper amount of caffeine.

 

[Mcupobob]

Notice that too, Jrpgs are alright though I've only played golden sun(which I thought was awsome) and I guess pokemon if that counts.

 

[Axeli]

Please read my post above and get your facts straight. Video game and tabletop RPGs are defined completely differently. The former borrows the gameplay mechanic from the latter, nothing else.

Pardon me if I disagree with Wikipedia.
They are different in how they are presented, certainly, but I think the fundamental ideas are the same: You're given a role, one which you may or may not choose, and are free to play it as you wish. Baldur's Gate, for example, had a pretty linear story. You were a child of Bhaal, no matter what, and the story went one way only, changing cosmetically if you were of good, neutral, or evil alignments. But: You chose your dialog, your quests, your companions! You defined your character. And even though the story was linear in how it played out, and many many of the choices were merely cosmetic, it was your story because you chose how you reacted to everything. You played your role.
That is a role playing game.

And I have yet to see that in a JRPG.
If it's out there, point the way.
Otherwise, these rail-RPGs aren't for me.

That is only your opinion. The wording "role playing" does not stem from there being literally roleplaying in the video games, but from the fact that they use similar gameplay mechanics.

I have sourced my claim, making it the universal one. Yours is just your own idea.

On the contrary, RPGs are supposed to be about role playing. Calling a level up system an ''RPG element'' is ignorance. Common ignorance, but ignorance none the less.

Exactly.

You see Onyx, the thing about leveling systems and stat tracking is that they are not exclusive to the RPG formula anymore (they used to be), so they can't really be said to define an RPG. And I'm not saying that every choice you make in an RPG as to be a moral quandary, but I do feel that every choice in the game has to have some kind of consequence for the game world or you personally. Which leads me to another problem I have with most JRPGS: the inability to create your own character. Yes, while this does generally mean that the main character would have voice acting, this also means that his/her personality is set in stone, and all your doing is taking over for the combat. For an RPG to truly be called an RPG, and this goes back to DND, it has to allow you to define your character's personality through in-game actions.

No. The fact that genres overlap and hybrids exist doesn't at all invalidate the definition of RPG. And it's still only few games that heavily rely on stat/skill building and leveling in their gameplay. There's a difference between having elements from another genre and having the stat based system at the core of the mechanics.
Genres borrow from each other all the time, that is nothing new, though perhaps more common these days.

 

[Lenny Magic]

I just don't buy 'em. I don't have much of a reason, though I don't like there is a lack of co-op.

 

[Hurr Durr Derp]

1. Female looking men:

That's only mostly in Square Enix games. I'm sick of people thinking that all JRPGs are Square Enix games.

As far as I know, most jRPG main characters are still girly men or children. Though this is only part of the larger issue that jRPGs pretty much never let you customise your characters. Sure you can equip them, sometimes name them, and if you're really lucky you get to choose what stats to raise, but there's almost never a way to really make a character your own. This is a fundamental difference between j- and wRPGs, and some people will prefer the one while some prefer the other.

2. Turn based combat:

In recent years, JRPGs have tried to get away from that, but as an example of how to make turn based combat feel fast-paced, see Grandia...Where you and the enemy can cancel each other's turns by disrupting one another, and different moves took longer to execute, plus you had to move to the enemy to attack (the game automatically moves you towards your target).

Examples of turn based combat in recent years from big name releases: Blue Dragon, Lost Odyssey, Persona. That's it. They're really trying to get away from it, with real time battles that you can pause to give orders when you want to.

That's are still more the exceptions than the rule. It's the same as saying that first person shooters don't mostly focus on guns because Half-Life lets you use a crowbar. Besides, a turn-based game with some changes is still a turn-based game. I also find it suspect that you mention several turn-based games but no real-time ones.

3. Story's lame:

You're kidding, right? JRPGs are known for their sweeping stories. You just don't have any choice over it. Well, there are a ton of cliches, but what isn't cliched at this point? Otherwise, TV Tropes [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FridgeBrilliance] wouldn't exist.

This is entirely a matter of opinion. You say sweeping story, I say poorly constructed overwrought mess. And it's not just that the stories contain a lot of cliches, it's that they all tend to contain the same set of cliches. Of course many wRPGs also use the same cliches, but again it becomes a matter of personal preference. Some people will prefer the easter standard set of cliches, others will prefer the western.

4. Not really Role-Playing if you can't make choices

I thought that RPGs were about leveling up, not moral choices.

You're confusing the issue. The statement "It's not role-playing if there aren't any choices to make" is technically true (there's a big difference between "role-playing" and "playing an RPG"), but the often mentioned issue isn't that jRPGs aren't really about roleplaying, but that jRPGs give false choices. The old "but you must"-thing. This is another big part of the "no way to make a character your own"-issue. You're not playing a character (roleplaying!), you're just watching a character move though the game and occasionally you help him fight boring battles.

I don't hate jRPGs. Not at all. I remember having a lot of fun with the PSX Final Fantasy games, and Golden Sun is still one of my favourite GBA games. It's just that most jRPGs feel much too limited, both in scope and in gameplay, when compared to wRPGs. They often try to make up for that with an over-the-top plot and flashy cinematics and pretty characters, but there's usually very little substance to it all.

In the end though, who fucking cares what other people think of your precious jRPGs? You enjoy them, so go play them! Apparently a lot of other people don't enjoy them, but why should it be your job to convince them otherwise? You can't tell people they should like something just because you do.

 

[D_987]

I've really grown out of it though I might play that copy of Lost Odyssey I have. My older bro told me to play it, he really likes it but I've heard mixed things and I'm not sure, is it any good?

It's very good.

Anyway, as for the topic in hand - it seems like the majority of posters on this site seem to have effectively attached a label to "RPG" and claimed "this defines an RPG", the problem with this is the fact that JRPGs are completely different types of experiences from WRPG's, and that trying to define them both using one explanation isn't going to work - there isn't a real definition of RPG because the genre will continue to evolve, just because Bioware games give you moral choices doesn't mean that all RPG's have to, to give an RPG experience.

 

[fletch_talon]

*Checks the RPG section at any and all online or physical game stores, as well as any form of publication that deals with videogames.*

Hmmmm turns out that JRPGs are in fact RPGs and the simple fact that a few of you don't think they should be doesn't mean a damn thing.

Its all in the name folks, regardless of how inaccurate the term "ROLE playing" is for a game like final fantasy is, it is an RPG because that is the genre to which it has been assigned.
In the world of videogames RPG refers to a game in which the primary feature is the creation or choice of a character whom you can customise through the use of leveling and stats.

END OF STORY.

 

[TheDoctor455]

Please read my post above and get your facts straight. Video game and tabletop RPGs are defined completely differently. The former borrows the gameplay mechanic from the latter, nothing else.

Pardon me if I disagree with Wikipedia.
They are different in how they are presented, certainly, but I think the fundamental ideas are the same: You're given a role, one which you may or may not choose, and are free to play it as you wish. Baldur's Gate, for example, had a pretty linear story. You were a child of Bhaal, no matter what, and the story went one way only, changing cosmetically if you were of good, neutral, or evil alignments. But: You chose your dialog, your quests, your companions! You defined your character. And even though the story was linear in how it played out, and many many of the choices were merely cosmetic, it was your story because you chose how you reacted to everything. You played your role.
That is a role playing game.

And I have yet to see that in a JRPG.
If it's out there, point the way.
Otherwise, these rail-RPGs aren't for me.

That is only your opinion. The wording "role playing" does not stem from there being literally roleplaying in the video games, but from the fact that they use similar gameplay mechanics.

I have sourced my claim, making it the universal one. Yours is just your own idea.

On the contrary, RPGs are supposed to be about role playing. Calling a level up system an ''RPG element'' is ignorance. Common ignorance, but ignorance none the less.

Exactly.

You see Onyx, the thing about leveling systems and stat tracking is that they are not exclusive to the RPG formula anymore (they used to be), so they can't really be said to define an RPG. And I'm not saying that every choice you make in an RPG as to be a moral quandary, but I do feel that every choice in the game has to have some kind of consequence for the game world or you personally. Which leads me to another problem I have with most JRPGS: the inability to create your own character. Yes, while this does generally mean that the main character would have voice acting, this also means that his/her personality is set in stone, and all your doing is taking over for the combat. For an RPG to truly be called an RPG, and this goes back to DND, it has to allow you to define your character's personality through in-game actions.

No. The fact that genres overlap and hybrids exist doesn't at all invalidate the definition of RPG. And it's still only few games that heavily rely on stat/skill building and leveling in their gameplay. There's a difference between having elements from another genre and having the stat based system at the core of the mechanics.
Genres borrow from each other all the time, that is nothing new, though perhaps more common these days.

Congratulations, you completely missed my point. My main point was that creating your own character and using in-game actions has always been a part of RPGs since Dungeons and Dragons birthed the genre.

 

[Buizel91]

the reason i don't really like them is because every character looks the same but with a different hair style, and sometimes i lose track on who's who.

i admit, i haven't played a JRPG in ages, but still, when you don't like summit, you don't go back...usually. unless i here of a good JRPG by someone...i probably wont play them

 

[The_Blue_Rider]

Well I do agree that blind hatred of JRPGs, or anything for that matter, needs to stop.
I'm not a JRPG fan myself, but if people like 'em then who cares?

I will touch on two points you made, though, based on my own experience:

3. Story's lame:

You're kidding, right? JRPGs are known for their sweeping stories. You just don't have any choice over it.

I have never seen a good story in a JRPG.
Sorry, maybe I've played the wrong ones, but choice has nothing to do with it. It's just cliche after cliche and always with the bad dialog. The JRPG I liked the most in terms of gameplay, Eternal Sonata, had the worst story. It was so pretentious, and so flat out awful that I skipped every cutscene after watching the first few, hoping it would turn out better.
It didn't.

4. Not really Role-Playing if you can't make choices

I thought that RPGs were about leveling up, not moral choices.

Example: When they say a game has "RPG elements", that doesn't mean moral choices have been added to the game. That means they've added a leveling system of some sort. Like the stat bars in GTA: San Andreas.

RPGs are about choices, not always moral choices.
Take 'moral' out of the equation. That has nothing to do with it. It's about choices, or, at the least, the illusion of choice. Give me multiple ways to play my role! Because that's what you're doing: Playing a role. Playing a role with no way to choose how to play it is just like any game. Then Half-life is an RPG because I'm playing the role of Gordon Freeman.

But once you factor in the choices, from how you level up, to how you respond to people, to which quests you take, to what weapons you wield! An RPG is putting a player within a role and letting them play it as they wish. JRPGs, in my experience, don't really do that. Your attributes all go up automatically, you are limited in what class of weapon you can use (Usually), and you can never choose dialog.

It's a Rail-RPG, really.
At least, in my experience it is.

Frankly, 'Tea, most of these criticisms can be levelled at most RPG's, role plays and indeed video games as a whole. Cliché's turn up in everything that has even a modicum of a story (Call of Duty 4 - Evil Russians, terrorists, gung-ho, sociopathic Americans and cunning, morally questionable Brits). Hell, even Baldur's Gate has the most cliché storyline of all - and that's a Western RPG classic.

Spoiler

Your adopted parent is killed by your psychotic half-brother, who wants to kill you so he can become...okay, fair enough, the Lord of Death, but so far, so Star Wars.

Knights of the Old Republic....again... cliché! Storyline is still cliché - you play 'The Mysterious Stranger[sup]TM[/sup]' yet again, with an identitkit set of abilities and appearance. You don't play a role - you play yourself, with blasters and vibroblades.

Fallout? You have to save your society....and the world has burned to the ground in the fires of nucleonic Armageddon?

Fact of the matter is that, well, all stories are, to some degree or another, cliché. Sure, it may be nauseating, absurd, pretentious cliché, but your conception that the all JRPG's will share this flaw, or indeed that this will make them all bad, is not accurate.

[sub] This post was made by a person who's last JRPG was Final Fantasy XII, which made him swear to never buy another. That being said, he's looking at Dragon Age: Origins, so don't take his swearing too seriously...[/sub]

Dragon Age isnt a JRPG though

Anyways, JRPG's arent my favourite games, but they are not that bad. I mean Golden Sun is one of my favourite games, I also liked Dragon Quest 8 although i never finished.
My main problem with the Genre (and surprisingly no one has mentioned this) is the GRINDING!. Its sooooooooo, Boring! I get it if you would want to level up a bit more to have an easier playthrough, but in some JRPGs, if you dont dont grind, your fucked
In most WRPGs i've noticed that enimes get stronger as you do so they are always a challenge
It would look like this
Player Level - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5
Enemy level - 1 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6

Wheras in JRPGs it would look like this

Player level - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5
Enemy level - 2 - 6 - 12 - 24- Its over 9000!!!!!!!!

Im also still kinda pissed that alot of japanese gamers think that the only real games are made in Japan

 

[Typhusoid]

You may be right on some of these points, but it is inarguable that there are staples of the JRPG genre, as with any genre, and if we dislike those staples it is likely that we will dislike the genre at large. Its the same for any genre really, FPS, RTS, its just that on this forum not many people seem to like JRPGs.