What defines a WRPG vs and/or JRPG?

[hermes]

Country of origin, pretty much.

That used to meant deeper differences in mechanics, narrative and themes (that used to be about JRPG having more defined characters while WRPG having more customization; JRPG being mostly about anime fantasy while WRPG being about D&D fantasy; JRPG being turn based while WRPG being more action driven); but, in time, both genres informed the other to the point some games defy characterization (for example: Dark Souls being a JRPG that looks like a WRPG, Costume Quest being a WRPG that looks like a JRPG)

 

[Rastrelly]

IMO, separation is clear:
jRPG - no actual 'character creation', player is not supposed to associate himself with any definite character and to be an outside being; wRPG - player is supposed to associate himself with a protagonist and all perspective is given this way. And actual 'country' or mechanical elements have no meaning this way: Sudeki is jRPG while being British and real-time, as well as (more or less) The Witcher.

 

[ArcadianDrew]

WRPG's evolved from DnD

JRPG's evolved from Visual Novels, where the main focus was always the story, told using pre-made character and choices were most of the time bound by said story. JRPG's tend to also focus on the story, with only actual RPG element (by western standarts) being class system and leveling.

Tha is as far as I am aware.

Actually, this is not really true. Both WRPGs and JRPGs have their origins in pen-and-paper DnD. You see in 1984 a game called The Black Onyx was released in Japan, a turn-based RPG heavily inspired by DnD, and games like Wizardry and Ultima. It was this that started a Japanese love affair with DnD in the 80's that lead to several Japanese companies making their own versions of DnD. Anyway, long story short, both Dragon Quest and Final Fantasy drew their inspiration from this game and DnD, that's why (in the original Final Fantasy in particular) you have classes like Fighter, Monk, Thief etc and enemies like slimes, kobalds(?) and goblins, because they were using DnD as their source.

I suspect the more linear and story centered RPGs Japan became famous for was more a result of limitations with the home console technology as Japan seemed to favour them, where as the west was more into the home computer, which I think was more powerful than gaming consoles. Could handle more freedom maybe?

Anyway, not having a go, I just think video game history is interesting. So there's my spiel.

PS. I wonder how many times I can fit 'DnD' into a paragraph?

 

[Auron225]

like the title says, what defines a western RPG and what defines a japanese RPG

Well, one is made in the "west" and the other is made in the "east" (typically, but not limited to, Japan). That's it.

That's what I came to say. I imagined "Japanese RPG" and "Western RPG" to be fairly self explanatory.

 

[go-10]

WRPG's evolved from DnD

JRPG's evolved from Visual Novels, where the main focus was always the story, told using pre-made character and choices were most of the time bound by said story. JRPG's tend to also focus on the story, with only actual RPG element (by western standarts) being class system and leveling.

Tha is as far as I am aware.

Actually, this is not really true. Both WRPGs and JRPGs have their origins in pen-and-paper DnD. You see in 1984 a game called The Black Onyx was released in Japan, a turn-based RPG heavily inspired by DnD, and games like Wizardry and Ultima. It was this that started a Japanese love affair with DnD in the 80's that lead to several Japanese companies making their own versions of DnD. Anyway, long story short, both Dragon Quest and Final Fantasy drew their inspiration from this game and DnD, that's why (in the original Final Fantasy in particular) you have classes like Fighter, Monk, Thief etc and enemies like slimes, kobalds(?) and goblins, because they were using DnD as their source.

I suspect the more linear and story centered RPGs Japan became famous for was more a result of limitations with the home console technology as Japan seemed to favour them, where as the west was more into the home computer, which I think was more powerful than gaming consoles. Could handle more freedom maybe?

Anyway, not having a go, I just think video game history is interesting. So there's my spiel.

PS. I wonder how many times I can fit 'DnD' into a paragraph?

so if we go even further back they both come from Lord of the Rings which is what inspired DnD which in turn created what we today know as video game RPG's

 

[Someone Depressing]

In terms of story, JRPGs put emphasis on characters.

In your average Final Fantasy game, excluding some of the earlier ones, you'll get a party of different stereotypes or trope shorthands, but they each get their own arc, other bits of characterisation sprinkled amongst the world, and all of that. It's ultimately about the heroes and how they develop their personalities, and how they appear to be trite and boring character types that get more and more fleshed out as the game goes in.

In terms of story, WRPGs put emphasis on world and player exploration.

Skyrim, Dark Souls (which has western RPG-style mechanics, even if it's Japan made - a good example of this being done) and many other games put an emphasis on the world. In Skyrim... yeah, there's some story and these people who are sort of freedom fighters... and... words, and... I don't care, where dem dragons at?

Bioware sort of skirts this. While the characters are probably the best part of Bioware's writing style, a lot of the world and player experience is built up through how the player interacts with it. Moral choices, random NPCs reaction to how you come across, even the tiniest things can help you gather an appreciation for the game's universe.

As for Child of Light, that fits quite squarely onto JRPG - very story heavy, with a mostly fixed story path and with a big grand plot about kids murdering Satan. Sort of.

 

[ArcadianDrew]

WRPG's evolved from DnD

JRPG's evolved from Visual Novels, where the main focus was always the story, told using pre-made character and choices were most of the time bound by said story. JRPG's tend to also focus on the story, with only actual RPG element (by western standarts) being class system and leveling.

Tha is as far as I am aware.

Actually, this is not really true. Both WRPGs and JRPGs have their origins in pen-and-paper DnD. You see in 1984 a game called The Black Onyx was released in Japan, a turn-based RPG heavily inspired by DnD, and games like Wizardry and Ultima. It was this that started a Japanese love affair with DnD in the 80's that lead to several Japanese companies making their own versions of DnD. Anyway, long story short, both Dragon Quest and Final Fantasy drew their inspiration from this game and DnD, that's why (in the original Final Fantasy in particular) you have classes like Fighter, Monk, Thief etc and enemies like slimes, kobalds(?) and goblins, because they were using DnD as their source.

I suspect the more linear and story centered RPGs Japan became famous for was more a result of limitations with the home console technology as Japan seemed to favour them, where as the west was more into the home computer, which I think was more powerful than gaming consoles. Could handle more freedom maybe?

Anyway, not having a go, I just think video game history is interesting. So there's my spiel.

PS. I wonder how many times I can fit 'DnD' into a paragraph?

so if we go even further back they both come from Lord of the Rings which is what inspired DnD which in turn created what we today know as video game RPG's

Eh, no. All I'm saying is the common thought that JRPGs came from visual novels is not true, and actually have common roots with WRPGs, even if they have diverged in the following years.

 

[small]

JRPG's for me at least tend to be a linear narrative based experience where it concentrates on the story while a CRPG tends to concentrate on exploring the world its self.

I suspect the reduction in JRPG's is that once they were the go to place for heavy, linear story telling but as technology and other genres have evolved that means people can look elsewhere for the things they would normally look to JRPG's for.

I also suspect alot of it is cultural as well. you tend to have more open worlds where you create your own place, etc in CRPG's which tends to go with the western idieal of freedom of the individual and finding your own way in the world,etc

 

[Britpoint]

Where they were developed. That's it. Game mechanics have no nationality.

Frankly, why is this even a distinction people make? Do we have JStealth Games (MGS) and WStealth Games (Splinter Cell)? JRacers (Ridge Racer) vs WRacers (NFS)?

No, this is a term coined by people who wanted to look down on RPGs developed in Japan because they weren't keen on the turn-based fights of Final Fantasy or the exaggerated haircuts. The term 'JRPG' exists solely so people could say "Unlike a JRPG, players in [Western game] can do [cool game mechanic]!" Even when praising them it's done in a backhanded way: "[New JRPG] avoids many of the TYPICAL JRPG TROPES that plague the genre..."

So there you go. In my view there are no mechanical or narrative differences between the two terms. Even if there are - to paint the entire RPG output of an entire region with a single brush based on flimsy trends is kind of gross. And then you get stuff like Child of Light being referred to by some as a "Western JRPG", which just makes my head explode. Why on Earth would anyone choose to use such a confusing term?

Just call them all RPGs. Final Fantasy, The Witcher, Dark Souls. Leave the country they were born out of it, it holds no relevance whatsoever as a genre name.

One more point actually: this thread comes up fairly often all over the place. The question: "What's the difference between a JRPG and WRPG?" Long discussions about the evolution of each region's game industry, the narrative trends, the mechanics trends, the different themes explored by each culture and the exceptions to the rules.

Doesn't the fact that we keep having to have this discussion kind of demonstrate that the genre labels aren't doing their job? I think it would be more constructive, instead of trying to find a way to make every single thing fit under one of these two umbrellas, to agree on some different labels that actually make sense.

 

[johnnybleu]

So there you go. In my view there are no mechanical or narrative differences between the two terms. Even if there are - to paint the entire RPG output of an entire region with a single brush based on flimsy trends is kind of gross. And then you get stuff like Child of Light being referred to by some as a "Western JRPG", which just makes my head explode. Why on Earth would anyone choose to use such a confusing term?

Yeah, but there IS a difference between the two genres, and I think it's an important distinction to make. I'm sorry that it makes your head explode, but if someone tells me a certain game is a Western JRPG I know exactly what they're talking about. Just saying "it's an RPG, and leave it at that" is a bit too broad for me.

It's like the difference between an arcade racer and a sim racer. They're just two board sub-categories to help differentiate certain games.

 

[Britpoint]

So there you go. In my view there are no mechanical or narrative differences between the two terms. Even if there are - to paint the entire RPG output of an entire region with a single brush based on flimsy trends is kind of gross. And then you get stuff like Child of Light being referred to by some as a "Western JRPG", which just makes my head explode. Why on Earth would anyone choose to use such a confusing term?

Yeah, but there IS a difference between the two genres, and I think it's an important distinction to make. I'm sorry that it makes your head explode, but if someone tells me a certain game is a Western JRPG I know exactly what they're talking about. Just saying "it's an RPG, and leave it at that" is a bit too broad for me.

It's like the difference between an arcade racer and a sim racer. They're just two board sub-categories to help differentiate certain games.

So, I'm assuming Child of Light is a 'JRPG' because of the turn based battles (similar to the ones many JRPGs such as Kingdom Hearts and Tales of Xillia don't have), but how does the 'Western' bit help? How is a WJRPG different to a JJRPG?

 

[KOMega]

I feel wrpg and jprg having more meaning than where they were developed is an old definition. Before they used to have more meaning, explaining game mechanics, story telling style and other stuff. But these days (and for a while now) the lines are starting to get blurred as both sides try new things and use each other's as well as new techniques.

To me it's a good thing that these lines are getting harder to see, since it also means that development is growing and changing.

 

[The Abhorrent]

I think a couple of more apt descriptors are called for at this point.
To give a brief overview...

Character-Builder RPG
What most would associate with a "Western RPG", the primary focus and drive for the player to build up their avatar in the game's setting; this typically comes with a stronger focus on exploration and customization, along with there seldom being a "party" for which the player. The Dark Souls franchise can easily be called a character-builder RPG, despite its Japanese origin.

Story-Driven RPG
This is closer to the commonly accepted "Japanese RPG" structure, and as the descriptor implies the primary purpose here is for the game to tell a good story; a party is commonly built around the central character, and tends to be much more focused while it steers the player down a somewhat linear path. An RPG of western origin which is definitely a story-driven game? The Mass Effect trilogy, and most of Bioware's other games; these games do have a great deal of customization and choice associated with them (a hallmark of the "WRPG" label), but the priority is ALWAYS the story.

---

Both types of RPGs use elements from the other: most character-builder RPGs have a plot to give the game at least some framework, while story-driven RPGs have elements of character-building to give the sense of progress. How far both types go into the other varies game-by-game, and it definitely is a good gradient between the two.

Nevertheless, the primary distinction is the focus of the game.

Is the main reason you play a game to progress through it and empower your avatar? It's a character-builder RPG.
Or do you play it to see the story play out, to see your your comrades and the world move through an epic tale? Then we have ourselves a story-driven RPG.

Then things get messy when one man's story-driven RPG becomes another's character-builder RPG, and vice versa.

 

[Blue C Jeffrey]

To me it's a good thing that these lines are getting harder to see, since it also means that development is growing and changing.

Agreed. I find it a bit odd when I read posts about how some JRPGs adopting some Western themes is a bad thing. Never really made sense to me, especially since it got us Dark Souls and Dragon's Dogma.

I'm crossing my fingers for a Western RPG set in a mythological feudal Japan, though. That would be awesome.

 

[McMarbles]

So, what would Fantasy Life be? It has a very Japanese aesthetic, but its structure is far closer to something like Skyrim.

That's why country of origin is the only way to go.

 

[johnnybleu]

So there you go. In my view there are no mechanical or narrative differences between the two terms. Even if there are - to paint the entire RPG output of an entire region with a single brush based on flimsy trends is kind of gross. And then you get stuff like Child of Light being referred to by some as a "Western JRPG", which just makes my head explode. Why on Earth would anyone choose to use such a confusing term?

Yeah, but there IS a difference between the two genres, and I think it's an important distinction to make. I'm sorry that it makes your head explode, but if someone tells me a certain game is a Western JRPG I know exactly what they're talking about. Just saying "it's an RPG, and leave it at that" is a bit too broad for me.

It's like the difference between an arcade racer and a sim racer. They're just two board sub-categories to help differentiate certain games.

So, I'm assuming Child of Light is a 'JRPG' because of the turn based battles (similar to the ones many JRPGs such as Kingdom Hearts and Tales of Xillia don't have), but how does the 'Western' bit help? How is a WJRPG different to a JJRPG?

Turn-based battles aren't the only thing that makes any RPG a JRPG. Wizardry had turn-based battles, as did most of the old D&D games, but they are strictly western. Nevertheless, Child of Light still shares many aspects of what can be called a "traditional" JRPG, and the "Western" part simply means that it was developed in the west and/or has a different style. I'm not saying the whole WRPG/JRPG dichotomy is absolute and perfect, or that they should be the only choices. I'm just saying they're still helpful and give a good indication of what to expect from a certain game.

One is made in Japan.
The other is made in the West.

That is all. They are relatively new terms. They are not true subgenres and really, the terms should just die.

The true subgenres (in which all RPGs fit) are as follows:

CRPG (turn-based) see. Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest, etc
SRPG (TRPG) (strategy/ tactical) see. Disgaea, Valkyria Chronicles, etc
ARPG (Action) see. Skyrim, Dark Souls, etc...
MMORPG (massive multiplayer online) see. WoW, SW:TOR, etc...
Roguelike (like Rogue) see. Rogue, Legasista, etc
Hack n' Slash (Loot) see. Diablo, Sacred, etc
Dungeon Crawler -- see. Persona, Wizardry, etc...

J and W are useless as they define NOTHING beyond geography, which is wholly unecessary (and racist) as a descriptor. It's as useless as forcing the tired Console Vs PC RPGs. Platform is also wholly unecessary.

The problem is that your classification is as arbitrary and insufficient as the WRPG/JRPG labels. Where would you put Baldur's Gate? It's generally thought to be a CRPG (computer RPG), but that's where you put FF and Dragon Quest (two series that aren't on PC?).

The fact remains that all the categories you listed are just tools to help describe the game-- as are the WRPG and JRPG categories. They just give you an idea of what to expect. ANY description of a game (arcade beat-em-up, brawler, 3D fighter, military FPS, point-and-click adventure, etc. etc. etc.) are just labels that we use to help guide us in the endless jungle of countless and diverse games. They're just guides, not absolutes.

And I certainly don't see how they can be racist...

 

[Britpoint]

Turn-based battles aren't the only thing that makes any RPG a JRPG. Wizardry had turn-based battles, as did most of the old D&D games, but they are strictly western. Nevertheless, Child of Light still shares many aspects of what can be called a "traditional" JRPG, and the "Western" part simply means that it was developed in the west and/or has a different style.

...But you've kinda proved my point there. So let me get this straight:

- Turn based battles are one of many things that makes an RPG a JRPG
- But some non-JRPG games can be turn based and still be strictly western.
- Child of light still shares "many" aspects (whatever these may be) of "traditional" JRPGs.
- But as Child of Light was developed in the west or "has a different style" (whatever that means) it is a "Western" JRPG.

So not only do we have extraordinarily vague and sometimes contradictory definitions of what constitutes a JRPG, we now also have have different *kinds* of JRPG based on whether they are Western or non-Western.

I'm not saying the whole WRPG/JRPG dichotomy is absolute and perfect, or that they should be the only choices. I'm just saying they're still helpful and give a good indication of what to expect from a certain game.

But these terms... they're harmful. I know plenty of people who like RPGs but won't even read a review if 'JRPG' is in the synopsis. "I don't like JRPGs - they're too linear/I hate turn based battles/I can't stand anime" are the kinds of reasons I get when I question them about it. These terms are steeped in sterotypes, and games these days are so varied the tropes are often incorrect anyway.

Genre labels are awful. Lord knows trying to subdivide all 'RPGs' into CRPGs/SRPGs/ARPGs is too complicated. The only sensible way to do it is be vague in terms of genre but then more specific in your description. Take Titanfall for example - it's an FPS. Nobody tries to call it a VFPS (V standing for vertical because they use jetpacks a lot) or MechFPS or any other weird thing. No, "It's an FPS where you can pilot robots and jump around with jetpacks".

Why can't we do the same thing with RPGs? It's a heck of a lot more elegant than trying to explain why a certain JRPG is definitely a JRPG even though it was developed in the west and also some of the things that make it a JRPG are also found in western games.