Okay, the majority of people here ragging on JRPGs have little enough idea what they are talking about. How do I know? Well one big clue is most of them start by saying they have never heard of TWEWY. In particular, people saying JRPGs are all the same have probably played little enough outside of FF, and saying all JPRGs are similar because all FFs are similar is like saying all American games are similar because all GTAs are similar. In truth, there is basically nothing in common between, say, Final Fantasy and Super Paper Mario or Earthbound.
Some random comments:
- Stories are all the same? Even bringing this up will surely make me sound super-uncool, but I would argue the main plot of even "kiddy" JRPGs like the Kingdom Hearts series (mainly KH2 and KH:CoM) are more original and more interesting than the vast majority of American RPG plots, certainly including every BioWare game I've ever played (basically everything before Mass Effect).
- Can't control the personality of your main character? True, but this drawback also allows for much more cohesive and personalized storytelling. Besides, the American answer of choosing between good vs evil has now become as repetitive and as gimmicky as anything in the Japanese market. Especially since it likely causes you to forget about character altogether and just "role-play" one decision at a time so as to optimize equipment.
- A lot of stock characters? To some extent, yes. But mainly, this is a problem with people only playing FFs where all characters are made by one guy, and he has trouble coming up with original ideas each game. And, uh, this isn't exactly unique to JRPGs. Or have you never met the evil wizard from American fantasy games?
- Most JRPGs involve saving the world? Well yeah. See also: RPGs from any culture, and indeed, most video games from anywhere.
- Linear? Yep. This is a personal preference - maybe it bothers you, maybe it doesn't. In general, non-linear equates to two things: the good path or the evil path gimmick, or the you can do things in different orders idea. The first is a gimmick, the second can be done badly as often as it can be done well, and in particular, it can lead to not having a cohesive purpose in the story - i.e., just explore until you win the game. There's also non-linear in the sense of optional content of course, but JRPGs have never shied away from that.
- Too many cutscenes? Well there are a lot usually. JRPGs have movie elements. No denying that. But the cutscenes are almost always well done and are usually skippable (helpful after deaths or on second playthroughs), so this is not a bad thing for a lot of people. If you want to be shooting off heads 95% of the time, yes, you picked the wrong game. But it's not like cutscenes should prevent most people from enjoying themselves except in extreme cases.
- Turn-based combat? Usually. Extra level-grinding required? Often not - all that is required is to (a) not run from fights, (b) not skip through areas quickly, and (c) learn how to use your abilities. If you want 100% completion, well then all bets are off, but meh. There certainly are action JRPGs out there too. See for example, Super Paper Mario, Kingdom Hearts, or Okami among recent games.
- Bad translations? Eh, when's the last time you've really played a JRPG? Translations have been fine since the Final Fantasy 3/6 days.
Not that I think anyone really cares. Shrug.
PS: The review was funny as it always is.