Zero Punctuation: Valkyria Chronicles

[nipsen]

Most of the classics of TBS like X-Com and Civilisation have no plot at all.

By contrast, it's very rare in JRPGs for the plot not to be central to the game experience.

*sigh* ...the problem was probably the idea that if you have a story- driven game and it's made in Japan, then it's a JRPG. But when a story- driven game is made in the west, then it's something else.

I'm not going to correct you or anything, I'm just going to state that I think this kind of thinking is pretty stupid. There are Asian games with indirect story- telling that lifts up what otherwise would be a generic button- masher, or a pretty simplistic strategy- game. There are Western games with exactly the same setup. And there are western RPGs that are story driven, even though they're not really made any more, and Obsidian isn't credited for pulling it off the last time.

But there hasn't been made a story- driven strategy- game with some role- playing elements before. So VC is actually pretty original.

So.. the point probably is - it has signs of a typical jrpg, like the magical animal crap, anxious teenagers and... well, nothing, really, if you actually played the game. So take from that what you want - imo, it's an original strategy- game with a good story that happens to have been made in Japan. If that makes it impossible for people to accept there may be other things in it than androgynous and anxious teenagers, voluptuous plots impossible to understand, pretentious dialogue that makes no sense, bad voice- acting, and so on - then you're just missing out on a very good game.

(A very good game that, surprisingly, only had the mind- reading magical pig "Hans" in it that screamed "made in Japan". There are other subtler things, like the lack of a perfect/overly macho hero fighting an evil empire one bad guy at a time, an evil government out to conduct experiments on your siblings, terrorists you can kill in droves, and space- nazis taking over the world by interrupting comically evil communists with a hive- like mentality. But other than that, even the most terminally xenophobic morons could play this game and "sort of like it", like Ben said. It really is that good.

Not that it matters, of course. The anti- war sentiment.. sorry, it doesn't actually have that.. The lack of patriotic glorification of armed conflict everywhere but in your own country.. there we go.. will still make those people furious and give them aneurysms in the brain. So frankly, if you're a moron, you'd better not risk exposing yourself to aggravating experiences like a good story told in an untraditional way).

 

[SYSTEM-J]

Most of the classics of TBS like X-Com and Civilisation have no plot at all.

By contrast, it's very rare in JRPGs for the plot not to be central to the game experience.

*sigh* ...the problem was probably the idea that if you have a story- driven game and it's made in Japan, then it's a JRPG. But when a story- driven game is made in the west, then it's something else.

I'm not going to correct you or anything, I'm just going to state that I think this kind of thinking is pretty stupid. There are Asian games with indirect story- telling that lifts up what otherwise would be a generic button- masher, or a pretty simplistic strategy- game. There are Western games with exactly the same setup. And there are western RPGs that are story driven, even though they're not really made any more, and Obsidian isn't credited for pulling it off the last time.

But there hasn't been made a story- driven strategy- game with some role- playing elements before. So VC is actually pretty original.

I don't see your point at all. The Japanese model of the RPG is quite a bit different to the original, Western concept. In fact, JRPGs aren't real RPGs at all, precisely because they give you a predefined character. The original model of a RPG is a game that lets you create a character and play the game in a way specific to you. That's the whole point of experience and character classes: to let you customise the play experience. True, pure RPGs should have no predefined story, and are dictated by devices such as Game Masters.

The Japanese took the turn based combat, stats, experience and other game mechanics but altered the core point considerably. They narrativised the genre: made the RPG an interactive narrative form. Originally, the RPG was not a narrative-driven genre at all.

That's why the emphasis on story in this game is significant. TBS, like the RPG, predates videogaming and goes back to board gaming and war gaming. In its roots, TBS is narrative-less. By placing a heavy emphasis on story, the Japanese are modifying the TBS just like they did the RPG before, through the same methods and drawing on the same stylistic influences.

Whatever your point is, it must have be some sort of objection to the "JRPG" as a genre - either you believe my definition is incorrect, or you don't believe the JRPG should be seperated from other RPGs. If so, I'd like to hear your argument.

(And yes, for the record I'm perfectly aware of plot-driven Western RPGs such as the Ultima games as old as the JRPG genre.)

 

[Barky13]

It was a good review. Far from the best but still good.

 

[nipsen]

Most of the classics of TBS like X-Com and Civilisation have no plot at all.

By contrast, it's very rare in JRPGs for the plot not to be central to the game experience.

*sigh* ...the problem was probably the idea that if you have a story- driven game and it's made in Japan, then it's a JRPG. But when a story- driven game is made in the west, then it's something else.

I'm not going to correct you or anything, I'm just going to state that I think this kind of thinking is pretty stupid. There are Asian games with indirect story- telling that lifts up what otherwise would be a generic button- masher, or a pretty simplistic strategy- game. There are Western games with exactly the same setup. And there are western RPGs that are story driven, even though they're not really made any more, and Obsidian isn't credited for pulling it off the last time.

But there hasn't been made a story- driven strategy- game with some role- playing elements before. So VC is actually pretty original.

I don't see your point at all. The Japanese model of the RPG is quite a bit different to the original, Western concept. In fact, JRPGs aren't real RPGs at all, precisely because they give you a predefined character. The original model of a RPG is a game that lets you create a character and play the game in a way specific to you. That's the whole point of experience and character classes: to let you customise the play experience. True, pure RPGs should have no predefined story, and are dictated by devices such as Game Masters.

The Japanese took the turn based combat, stats, experience and other game mechanics but altered the core point considerably. They narrativised the genre: made the RPG an interactive narrative form. Originally, the RPG was not a narrative-driven genre at all.

Yes.. only controlled by games- masters, who lead the player around in a story, with predetermined characters, and set pieces and rules and stories.

Look. The idea here is that the role- playing element in a video- game is really your engagement in the game, or with the characters and the world. "WRPG"s simply removing the story- development, and putting you in a soulless game where you fantastically can pick up on the story and earn experience by reading books (in the game) to pick up on the plot - that is, apart from being a sign of an eminently lazy development team, also a variant of that indirect, passive, role- playing. So you're simply incorrect. There's no "real" role- playing going on in video- games, as long as you don't actually interact with other human players.

Instead, there are more or less narrative- driven stories that you take a part in, and feel engaged in with more or less success depending on your subjective preference. And the type of role- playing typically in jrpgs, the introspective one where you fill in the reasoning and motivation for the characters, that may not appeal to you. But to others it's a way to engage in the game and the story - for example in a more involved way than when reading a book, while being less improvised than a typical role- playing session. In my opinion, these games could easily be called a "game- novel", or something like that, to better explain the concept.

It's very strange, but I keep seeing this "idea" you're coming up with a lot. That as long as you can customize your character - even if you are dangling like a balloon at the end of the dungeon master's hand, and all the dialogue greets you with "Hail, *bzzt* player name here *bzzt*" - then it's a role- playing game. It's not.

That's why the emphasis on story in this game is significant. TBS, like the RPG, predates videogaming and goes back to board gaming and war gaming. In its roots, TBS is narrative-less. By placing a heavy emphasis on story, the Japanese are modifying the TBS just like they did the RPG before, through the same methods and drawing on the same stylistic influences.

... you're mad they've "taken" something "we" owned..? Seriously?

Whatever your point is, it must have be some sort of objection to the "JRPG" as a genre - either you believe my definition is incorrect, or you don't believe the JRPG should be seperated from other RPGs. If so, I'd like to hear your argument.

(And yes, for the record I'm perfectly aware of plot-driven Western RPGs such as the Ultima games as old as the JRPG genre.)

...*cough* The point(I explained above) was that calling it a JRPG because it's 1. made in Japan, and 2. has certain role- playing elements - is daft. Just as daft as calling a western- made action- adventure game with role- playing elements an RPG. It doesn't tell you anything useful about the game.

 

[SYSTEM-J]

I love how you've "quoted" words I didn't actually say. When did I say "we"? When did I say anyone owned anything? And where, indeed, did you get the idea I was angry?

It seems to me you have a bias towards JRPGs so you both see the need to defend them and to legitimate them in relation to "soulless" Western RPGs, to the extent you're defending them when there's no need. I'm not passing judgement on:
1. VC.
2. JRPGs.
3. Anything else.
Whether JRPGs or Western RPGs "appeal" to me is not the issue at all. This is a discussion of classification, not of preference.

It's very strange, but I keep seeing this "idea" you're coming up with a lot. That as long as you can customize your character - even if you are dangling like a balloon at the end of the dungeon master's hand, and all the dialogue greets you with "Hail, *bzzt* player name here *bzzt*" - then it's a role- playing game. It's not.

Again, nice job on "quoting" a word I never actually typed. Are you deliberately trying to misrepresent me, or is it a stylistic oddity? Also "It's not" is a proof by assertion. I've stated my reasoning, I haven't heard a refute. There are, for the record, totally narrative-less RPGs in videogames. Zangband springs to mind. A pure RPG is just a rule-set dictating a play dynamic, onto which any character or story can be ascribed by the players. Obviously, concessions have to be made in the limited world of videogames, but the Japanese changed narrative from a concession to an emphasis.

...*cough* The point(I explained above) was that calling it a JRPG because it's 1. made in Japan, and 2. has certain role- playing elements - is daft. Just as daft as calling a western- made action- adventure game with role- playing elements an RPG. It doesn't tell you anything useful about the game.

Again, I don't see your point. I didn't call VC a JRPG.

 

[Triple G]

[...]and Mr.GGG (historian wannbe)[...]

I am no historian wannabe. I just read more about WWII than most people can fit in their head.

And please... don't try to flame-war-fight me. It won't turn out well for you. Also the fact of your trying to defend a JRPG tells me much about you and your so called "superior gamer intelect" or how you ever might call it, I don't really care. You might get credibility from most people(as most people are stupid follower-sheep-humans with no sense for individuality, real freedom and no own opinion). Also I as an RTS, an RPG and an FPS fan will not tolerate such attempts of mixing those genres like the developers of "Valkyria Chronicles" intended and did it. THIS is raping 3 genres at one time.

You're absolutely right, Deus Ex was a heinous abomination that fouled the most holy genre distinctions of the gaming scriptures.

(No, I lied. You're just batshit insane.)

You don't get it, do you? I wasj ust saying, that THIS game was an abominations, there are mix-ups of gerne's which are good. Like "Rise & Fall" for example. I'm no enemy of mix-ups, I'm an enemy of bad games and a game where enemies shoot you when it's not their turn is obviosly bullshit.

 

[WW]

It's seems to me that the only thing in this thread that has any connection to "bullshit" is that...you are full of shit.

 

[WW]

4. While that technically makes it an RPG, VC includes a lot of TBS features alongside a lot of JRPG features, as do games such as Fire Emblem. I would suggest these JRPG/TBS hybrids comprise a genre in their own right: the Japanese Role Playing Strategy, if you will. Invent your own cute name.

To summarise: VC can justifiably be called a JRPG, but also a TBS. Neither side is going to win that debate. I suggest you think of VC and its ilk as part of a seperate genre, or at least too inextricably hybridised to neatly pigeonhole in existing categories.

The presence of a player avatar (which is absent in strategy games) and the centrality of that avatar to a highly developed linear narrative. It's quite rare in strategy games for the plot to be a crucial aspect of the game experience. Even in games such as C&C which employ cinematic narrative devices, the plot is largely a framework to the action. Most of the classics of TBS like X-Com and Civilisation have no plot at all.

So basiclly those JRPG features you where talking about are as followed:
- players avatar
- plot driven game

**************************Utter Rubbish**************************

By your logic "Warcraft 3" is also partly a JRPG and there for can be called as that. Why? You know, we have an Avatar and also a Plot that is a "crucial aspect of the game experience". Now that I think about it, what your are implying is that any game that has those two elements must be at least partly a JRPG. Dang!

By contrast, it's very rare in JRPGs for the plot not to be central to the game experience. That's why many JRPG franchises run for many iterations with minimal or no alterations to gameplay: the story is a huge selling point.

O-k, so you are saying that a JRPG are plot driven... now that was very enlightning.

If VC had been made by a Western developer by TBS conventions it wouldn't have nearly so much emphasis on plot.

Excuse me by those are speculations on your side.

The fact the game borrows a large amount stylistically from JRPGs and anime is secondary, but still worth noting.

Yes, that's what I'm implying in my earlier posts.

 

[SYSTEM-J]

As I said in my first post, turn based combat is found in both RPGs and TBS, so in full, the list is:

1. Player avatar.
2. Central emphasis on plot.
3. Turn based combat.
4. Stylistic similarities.

Warcraft 3 has real time combat and no stylistic similarities, although for the record I think it's fairly obviously influenced by RPGs, especially as Blizzard's previous game was an RPG and they went on to take the Warcraft franchise into full-on RPG territory.

I should warn you, though, that my logic does not merely consist of ticking off traits on a bullet-point list, because that is genre classification through "outer form", which is not really what I'm talking about. If "player avatar" and "plot" were all I were classifying by, Halo would be a JRPG.

Incidentally, I think you should pay attention to the word "conventions". I don't think it's speculation to say it's unconventional for a Western TBS to have little or no plot. The closest you've named is an RTS, which is not a "classic strategy game". The RTS is the youngest genre in gaming, and since its inception with Dune II (for the sake of argument) it has contained a more heavy emphasis on narrative.

If you agree with that, then there's no speculation at all.

 

[MartnRendrs]

He sounded like he was making fun of autistic people at "how I feel about JRPGs"

Good aside from that,

sounds like u don't know shit about autism

Apart from the fact I am autistic and am part of the National Autistic Society :I

there's a society!? never knew, i doubt any1 on my school knows about one existing

 

[Triple G]

It's seems to me that the only thing in this thread that has any connection to "bullshit" is that...you are full of shit.

People with no serious arguments go over to insults.

 

[WW]

No serious arguments... cheeky basterd you are.

Go back and read post #445.

EDIT: Oh yeah, while you are at it, go back to post #425 and adress that bit where you are mentioned.

 

[Levaetus]

Good review I really enjoyed it. Dang Nazi's.

 

[Triple G]

I am no historian wannabe. I just read more about WWII than most people can fit in their head.

And please... don't try to flame-war-fight me. It won't turn out well for you.

Ok, I really didn't want to show what my real thoughs are but if you insist, I will tell you why I called you a "historian wannabe". This was the mildest term I could find for someone who wrote this:

- "The USSR had like 80% of the war and has beaten the Germans almost singlehandetly"
- "the so called "allies" dropped in after Germany already lost the key battles(Moscow, Stalingrad & Kursk)
- Besides that the so called "Allies" alomst didn't fight real soldiers at all. They fought 14-year old children and old men from the "Volkssturm" who had just old stuff because all the REAL stuff had to be moved to fight the USSR.

Nope, I got THIS info from German books. And please, western countries had(and have) even worse propaganda than the USSR could even dream of, so stop undermining soviet credibility.


EDIT:

I highly respect how you try to defend this game, but WC3 is in no way a JRPG. Because there is a crucial thing that makes a game with RPG elements a JRPG. The "J" means "Japanese". Ok, you probably knew that, but bear with me here. See, every JRPG(every single one of them) has the same "Japanese" elements which drive me crazy. That is: Wannabe-Dramatic plot with the death of family members, (androgyne) anime characters, super-wannabe-bad-ass protagonists who can take on armies alone and win(watch the "Lost Odyssey" episode of "Unskippable", I slapped my face when the non-talking protagonist blocked a twin-linked giant flamethrower with a sword and cuts up a giant walker-thing with the same sword), really really stupid outfits, uberlong speeches about stuff I do not care about, and so on.

The only JRPG I ever liked was Grandia II because it had a really funny conspiracy plot towards the end and the lion-human-thing(*smurf *smurf*) was killed on the fucking moon. But this game had a series of really sickening cutscene, but it was really wacky fun because they were about which of the female loveinterests two personalities the protagonist wants to be with

 

[Knight Templar]

I am no historian wannabe. I just read more about WWII than most people can fit in their head.

And please... don't try to flame-war-fight me. It won't turn out well for you.

Ok, I really didn't want to show what my real thoughs are but if you insist, I will tell you why I called you a "historian wannabe". This was the mildest term I could find for someone who wrote this:

- "The USSR had like 80% of the war and has beaten the Germans almost singlehandetly"
- "the so called "allies" dropped in after Germany already lost the key battles(Moscow, Stalingrad & Kursk)
- Besides that the so called "Allies" alomst didn't fight real soldiers at all. They fought 14-year old children and old men from the "Volkssturm" who had just old stuff because all the REAL stuff had to be moved to fight the USSR.

Nope, I got THIS info from German books. And please, western countries had(and have) even worse propaganda than the USSR could even dream of, so stop undermining soviet credibility.

"soviet credibility"? Thats a laugh.

 

[eyedonutkair]

har, 3:54 he caught himself. that ish is classic. ) 463rd!

 

[eyedonutkair]

how do you do the quote inserts? and how could anyone who reads so much about ww2 not understand that no one cares about random facts, and if you read so much, y can't you spell?

 

[WW]

You can always do it manualy, like myself.

I'm not to clever.

[ q u o t e = "eyedonutkair"]I'm not to clever.[/ q u o t e]

Without spacebars.

Cool SYSTEM-J, I didn't forget about you, just didn't have time.

 

[sazzrah]

It's sad seeing people saying "thanks Yahtzee for saving my money!" for this game which is easily the best RPG this generation has produced thus far. It's an original and addicting take on the Strategy RPG; it's really a great, great game with a brilliant story.

I've always felt that Yahtzee's reviews are mostly for entertainment purposes, so seeing some people drop the idea of purchasing probably one of the best games you'll ever play because of what he says about it is a real, real shame.

 

[tantric whale]

Yatzees humor and games have been week latley for the last month