This topic is locked from further discussion.
I have only played three WRPGs so it might just be that I picked some bad apples but after playing Oblivion, Mass Effect and Fable 2 (well I didn't beat it but I watched my brother beat it) I was wondering, are all "boss" battles a huge joke? What is the point of even including them into the game?
I like how WRPGs are more open world compared to JRPGs but atleast JRPGs have BOSS battles right.
Actually, I think JRPG boss battles need some serious tweaking. Honest to god, I've been in JRPG's where I was an unstoppable force during the main part of a mission, and could even go through 20 fights in a row with minimal damage, go to the boss fight with plentiful health, mana, potions and antidotes and whatnot, and have the boss repeatedly kick my ass into next week. I always think to myself, where the hell do these guys come from?
Actually, I think JRPG boss battles need some serious tweaking. Honest to god, I've been in JRPG's where I was an unstoppable force during the main part of a mission, and could even go through 20 fights in a row with minimal damage, go to the boss fight with plentiful health, mana, potions and antidotes and whatnot, and have the boss repeatedly kick my ass into next week. I always think to myself, where the hell do these guys come from?
Bluestorm-Kalas
Haha I used to hate that but after seeing the "boss" battles in those games, I would rather get annihilated like that instead of being able to beat a boss with your TV off, that's how easy it was in those three games. Out of those three, Saren on the hardest difficulty was the hardest, but even then he wasn't that hard to me.
For the most part, yes, last bosses are like that in WRPG's. I think since most WRPG's deal with revenge in one way or another the game enables you to feel like you've really advanced and you've become more powerful than the last guy. Especially in WRPG's that let you choose good/evil sides, this design decision is empowering.
I never enjoyed doing all that leveling in JRPG's only to find that the last boss is some multitiered boss with cheap moves and have difficulty beating him/her/it.
If you want to experience some WRPG's with some what difficult final acts, try Baldur's Gate II, Neverwinter Nights 2 and its expansion and Freedom Force. All these games are on PC and the first and last one should play on almost any pc.
For the most part, yes, last bosses are like that in WRPG's. I think since most WRPG's deal with revenge in one way or another the game enables you to feel like you've really advanced and you've become more powerful than the last guy. Especially in WRPG's that let you choose good/evil sides, this design decision is empowering.smerlus
That makes sense, although I don't like it. After all it is a game, I would like the final battle to be a little bit more challenging.
I'll probably pick up the games you recommended when I build my PC. (Gotta get ready for Battlefield 3 unless something goes horribly wrong, that game will take a dump on everything else)
Actually, I think JRPG boss battles need some serious tweaking. Honest to god, I've been in JRPG's where I was an unstoppable force during the main part of a mission, and could even go through 20 fights in a row with minimal damage, go to the boss fight with plentiful health, mana, potions and antidotes and whatnot, and have the boss repeatedly kick my ass into next week. I always think to myself, where the hell do these guys come from?
Bluestorm-Kalas
IMHO, that is a mark of poor game balancing. I strongly dislike when that happens.
Well most new age WRPGs are easy in fact due to the fact gaming has opened to a more casual audience and they are pretty much in decline as well, mixing themselves with FPS and are more and more action driven mostly. If you want hardcore stuff you got to check out the old ones, like Baldur's gate 1-2, Icewind dale 1-2, Fallout 1-2. I haven't seen a WRPG that was crazy hard in years...
Out of what you named, Mass Effect can be brutal once you unlock the difficulty levels but yes even on hard its pretty easy, its a shame you have to unlock the 2 other difficulty settings before playing them. Out of the old games, id say Icewind dale 2 is really hardcore stuff, its extremely hard even on easy, Baldur's gate series are pretty hard too and so can be the fallout series. But to answer your questions, not all WRPGs are like this, the best we can do is cross fingers and hope they make a WRPG who has a decent difficulty level.
I dunno about the rest of you but I thought Sin was the biggest joke as a final boss, and that was from a JRPG.
In any case you have to look at the devolopers, its no secret that the difficulty on JRPG's are often toned down for US/Euro players. WRPG's are made with US/Euro players in mind, so maybe its just that Devs are still in the process of getting a good blend of difficulty and strategy without making it feel like a platformer. But thats just my thoughts on the subject.
Challenging boss fights still exist in WRPGS, just not Oblivion. Check out Neverwinter Nights 2, Vampire The Masquerade Bloodlines and Baldurs Gate 2: Throne Of Bhaal for some great boss fights.GodModeEnabled
The AI in Vampires is shoddy and made the bosses easy to beat. If they weren't total idiots and had at least Turok 2 AI, then they may have been hard.
I find WRPGs sucking. My brother made me play couple of them times ago and it just made me hate them more. I prefer JRPGs the most, or with better words, Final Fantasy series. Huge fan, I tell ya.
I can't just find that thing about WRPGs or FPS:s that makes people buy them. When I see an enemy or worse, enemies, I just start shooting like crazy in every direction and when the bullets are used up, I die. End of story.
[QUOTE="GodModeEnabled"]Challenging boss fights still exist in WRPGS, just not Oblivion. Check out Neverwinter Nights 2, Vampire The Masquerade Bloodlines and Baldurs Gate 2: Throne Of Bhaal for some great boss fights.smerlus
The AI in Vampires is shoddy and made the bosses easy to beat. If they weren't total idiots and had at least Turok 2 AI, then they may have been hard.
Maybe back when you played the game but its up to like patch 5.3 or something now so its pretty good. I never noticed a lack of challenge or anything thats for sure.[QUOTE="smerlus"][QUOTE="GodModeEnabled"]Challenging boss fights still exist in WRPGS, just not Oblivion. Check out Neverwinter Nights 2, Vampire The Masquerade Bloodlines and Baldurs Gate 2: Throne Of Bhaal for some great boss fights.GodModeEnabled
The AI in Vampires is shoddy and made the bosses easy to beat. If they weren't total idiots and had at least Turok 2 AI, then they may have been hard.
Maybe back when you played the game but its up to like patch 5.3 or something now so its pretty good. I never noticed a lack of challenge or anything thats for sure.I just remembered the one fight in the sewer i think, that I just had to run backwards and shoot so the vampires with swords couldn't kill me.
and the bodyguard, I just had to go up and down the stairs because he gets locked in this repeating ai of jumping up to the second floor and back down.
I wouldnt really call Baulders Gate and Icewind Dale JRPG's though.
I can't just find that thing about WRPGs or FPS:s that makes people buy them. When I see an enemy or worse, enemies, I just start shooting like crazy in every direction and when the bullets are used up, I die. End of story.
PlaWeird
Thats how I feel about JRPG's. By now if you've played a couple different types you've played them all. So I dont understand why people still make a mess of themselves trying to get the latest one.
Actually, I think JRPG boss battles need some serious tweaking. Honest to god, I've been in JRPG's where I was an unstoppable force during the main part of a mission, and could even go through 20 fights in a row with minimal damage, go to the boss fight with plentiful health, mana, potions and antidotes and whatnot, and have the boss repeatedly kick my ass into next week. I always think to myself, where the hell do these guys come from?
Bluestorm-Kalas
yea bosses are supposed to give u a challenge yea good bosses should be in WRPG's then again WRPG's suck compared to JRPGs but they are still good
Actually, I think JRPG boss battles need some serious tweaking. Honest to god, I've been in JRPG's where I was an unstoppable force during the main part of a mission, and could even go through 20 fights in a row with minimal damage, go to the boss fight with plentiful health, mana, potions and antidotes and whatnot, and have the boss repeatedly kick my ass into next week. I always think to myself, where the hell do these guys come from?
Bluestorm-Kalas
Most JRPG has good pacing.
If you are able to kill things without fearing for death in a dungeon, the boss of that dungeon can be beaten without extra grind.
It's just most JRPGs are made in a way that against a boss, you need to think a little and plan yourself better. Little bit of trial and errors and play more like puzzle than just go ahead and beat the **** out of him.
Which I personally think is the highlight of JRPG and a good challenge. Thinking once in a while doesn't hurt.
It's just most JRPGs are made in a way that against a boss, you need to think a little and plan yourself better. Little bit of trial and errors and play more like puzzle than just go ahead and beat the **** out of him.
Which I personally think is the highlight of JRPG and a good challenge. Thinking once in a while doesn't hurt.
TriangleHard
Haha, exactly my thoughts :D
I find WRPGs sucking. My brother made me play couple of them times ago and it just made me hate them more. I prefer JRPGs the most, or with better words, Final Fantasy series. Huge fan, I tell ya.
I can't just find that thing about WRPGs or FPS:s that makes people buy them. When I see an enemy or worse, enemies, I just start shooting like crazy in every direction and when the bullets are used up, I die. End of story.
PlaWeird
How many WRPG's have you played? JRPG's are terrible and have not changed in 15 years, they are all the same, linear, no replay value, you have no choice in how the story plays out, many WRPG's have just as good stories without the lame restrictions JRPG's have.
Everyone who are interested in story following wants to buy JRPGs. I love it that you can just live with the story and be part of the characters' thoughts and history.
WRPGs are just full of guns and noisy stuff.
Geez, you sound just like my brother :D
PlaWeird
Once again, showing total ignorance, many WRPG's have deep stories that match or surpass any JRPG, and they do not have the outdated restrictions and overly reliance on dragged out cut scenes and linear gameplay, and a lack of choices you have in those games. JRPG's are everything that is wrong with gamong, refuslal to change.
Most JRPG has good pacing.
If you are able to kill things without fearing for death in a dungeon, the boss of that dungeon can be beaten without extra grind.
It's just most JRPGs are made in a way that against a boss, you need to think a little and plan yourself better. Little bit of trial and errors and play more like puzzle than just go ahead and beat the **** out of him.
Which I personally think is the highlight of JRPG and a good challenge. Thinking once in a while doesn't hurt.
TriangleHard
I agree that mid bosses might have strategy to them but the usual final boss in a JRPG is nothing more than an endurance tennis match. If you're at the right level and have enough healing aids, you attack until they unleash some devestating move that critically injures you, you heal and then go on the offensive. This goes on and on until all 4,000,000 hit points are gone.
It's about as much strategy as taking cover in Halo
[QUOTE="PlaWeird"]I find WRPGs sucking. My brother made me play couple of them times ago and it just made me hate them more. I prefer JRPGs the most, or with better words, Final Fantasy series. Huge fan, I tell ya.
I can't just find that thing about WRPGs or FPS:s that makes people buy them. When I see an enemy or worse, enemies, I just start shooting like crazy in every direction and when the bullets are used up, I die. End of story.
doyousmellthat
How many WRPG's have you played? JRPG's are terrible and have not changed in 15 years, they are all the same, linear, no replay value, you have no choice in how the story plays out, many WRPG's have just as good stories without the lame restrictions JRPG's have.
Total two. And never again shall I touch them. I think that the only one and true JRPG is Final Fantasy, the series and I have seen how the other series or just single games can't figure anything different out. Elves...? You gotta be kidding me.
[QUOTE="PlaWeird"]Everyone who are interested in story following wants to buy JRPGs. I love it that you can just live with the story and be part of the characters' thoughts and history.
WRPGs are just full of guns and noisy stuff.
Geez, you sound just like my brother :D
doyousmellthat
Once again, showing total ignorance, many WRPG's have deep stories that match or surpass any JRPG, and they do not have the outdated restrictions and overly reliance on dragged out cut scenes and linear gameplay, and a lack of choices you have in those games. JRPG's are everything that is wrong with gamong, refuslal to change.
Yes, I could see your total ignorance.
That, my dear, depends totally for what kind of games are you interested. I don't like WRPGs, because they just are what they are in their whole war, guns and reality.
I'm a dreamer, I want to experience fantasy and get some rest for my soul. You seriously can't find that from WRPGs, I've seen killing enough.
[QUOTE="PlaWeird"]Everyone who are interested in story following wants to buy JRPGs. I love it that you can just live with the story and be part of the characters' thoughts and history.
WRPGs are just full of guns and noisy stuff.
Geez, you sound just like my brother :D
doyousmellthat
Once again, showing total ignorance, many WRPG's have deep stories that match or surpass any JRPG, and they do not have the outdated restrictions and overly reliance on dragged out cut scenes and linear gameplay, and a lack of choices you have in those games. JRPG's are everything that is wrong with gamong, refuslal to change.
change is overrated, and it often brings blind individuals that f***s up others without remorse. Like Nazis
anyway, Story in JRPG and WRPG both has their values.
JRPGs often NEEDS to be linear. Many of their stories are deep and complicated, but that's not all. They are also subtle. To give player's choice in that matter, would change many of their subtle touches and ruin the entire story. Eternal Sonata is good example. Change one thing in there, and give a choice to player in that game, and you simply might ruin that delicate story.
Also, JRPG does experiement many with stories. Even back in SNES era, when Western developers treated story like how porn director would, Star Ocean comes with interesting interaction method called Private Action, that allows you to interact with party members and show individualism and characteristics of each party members and your relationship with them.
Recently, Persona 3 managed to make interesting and unique story telling using social links.
Suikoden 3, also tried to use interesting story telling technique by telling stories in multiple parts and then allow the player to choose main character.
Dragon Quest V (? was it IV?) had hours of gameplay without main character even appearing. How unique is that?
Compared to this, most WRPG is just focused with creating a fantasy world that people tends to like (whether it is dragons and knight or sci-fi) and give you as much choice as possible, with less emphisis on creating unique story of their own. Mostly they use cliche plotline, but gives players plenty of choices to make it unique. KOTOR people said was unique and great, but in my eyes, it was quite predictable and rather plain and traditional.
Not all JRPG does story well, and at times their unique approach goes wrong direction often, but story alone are often interesting enough for people to seek for JRPGs. It's not even matter of how you tell the story, but story itself, is often unique and interesting. That almost never happens in WRPGs.
Gates of Oblivion is opening and you need to seek last remaining heir to the throne, is not summary of a story I'd be interested in.
Exploring the dream of Chopin in his moment of death, now that sounds unique and interesting story I'd like to give it a try.
That's the reason why JRPG will always have fans.
[QUOTE="doyousmellthat"][QUOTE="PlaWeird"]Everyone who are interested in story following wants to buy JRPGs. I love it that you can just live with the story and be part of the characters' thoughts and history.
WRPGs are just full of guns and noisy stuff.
Geez, you sound just like my brother :D
TriangleHard
Once again, showing total ignorance, many WRPG's have deep stories that match or surpass any JRPG, and they do not have the outdated restrictions and overly reliance on dragged out cut scenes and linear gameplay, and a lack of choices you have in those games. JRPG's are everything that is wrong with gamong, refuslal to change.
change is overrated, and it often brings blind individuals that f***s up others without remorse. Like Nazis
anyway, Story in JRPG and WRPG both has their values.
JRPGs often NEEDS to be linear. Many of their stories are deep and complicated, but that's not all. They are also subtle. To give player's choice in that matter, would change many of their subtle touches and ruin the entire story. Eternal Sonata is good example. Change one thing in there, and give a choice to player in that game, and you simply might ruin that delicate story.
Also, JRPG does experiement many with stories. Even back in SNES era, when Western developers treated story like how porn director would, Star Ocean comes with interesting interaction method called Private Action, that allows you to interact with party members and show individualism and characteristics of each party members and your relationship with them.
Recently, Persona 3 managed to make interesting and unique story telling using social links.
Suikoden 3, also tried to use interesting story telling technique by telling stories in multiple parts and then allow the player to choose main character.
Dragon Quest V (? was it IV?) had hours of gameplay without main character even appearing. How unique is that?
Compared to this, most WRPG is just focused with creating a fantasy world that people tends to like (whether it is dragons and knight or sci-fi) and give you as much choice as possible, with less emphisis on creating unique story of their own. Mostly they use cliche plotline, but gives players plenty of choices to make it unique. KOTOR people said was unique and great, but in my eyes, it was quite predictable and rather plain and traditional.
Not all JRPG does story well, and at times their unique approach goes wrong direction often, but story alone are often interesting enough for people to seek for JRPGs. It's not even matter of how you tell the story, but story itself, is often unique and interesting. That almost never happens in WRPGs.
Gates of Oblivion is opening and you need to seek last remaining heir to the throne, is not summary of a story I'd be interested in.
Exploring the dream of Chopin in his moment of death, now that sounds unique and interesting story I'd like to give it a try.
That's the reason why JRPG will always have fans.
That was deep.
Applauds.
[QUOTE="doyousmellthat"][QUOTE="PlaWeird"]I find WRPGs sucking. My brother made me play couple of them times ago and it just made me hate them more. I prefer JRPGs the most, or with better words, Final Fantasy series. Huge fan, I tell ya.
I can't just find that thing about WRPGs or FPS:s that makes people buy them. When I see an enemy or worse, enemies, I just start shooting like crazy in every direction and when the bullets are used up, I die. End of story.
PlaWeird
How many WRPG's have you played? JRPG's are terrible and have not changed in 15 years, they are all the same, linear, no replay value, you have no choice in how the story plays out, many WRPG's have just as good stories without the lame restrictions JRPG's have.
Total two. And never again shall I touch them. I think that the only one and true JRPG is Final Fantasy, the series and I have seen how the other series or just single games can't figure anything different out. Elves...? You gotta be kidding me.
[QUOTE="PlaWeird"]Everyone who are interested in story following wants to buy JRPGs. I love it that you can just live with the story and be part of the characters' thoughts and history.
WRPGs are just full of guns and noisy stuff.
Geez, you sound just like my brother :D
doyousmellthat
Once again, showing total ignorance, many WRPG's have deep stories that match or surpass any JRPG, and they do not have the outdated restrictions and overly reliance on dragged out cut scenes and linear gameplay, and a lack of choices you have in those games. JRPG's are everything that is wrong with gamong, refuslal to change.
Yes, I could see your total ignorance.
That, my dear, depends totally for what kind of games are you interested. I don't like WRPGs, because they just are what they are in their whole war, guns and reality.
I'm a dreamer, I want to experience fantasy and get some rest for my soul. You seriously can't find that from WRPGs, I've seen killing enough.
War guns reality? You have no clue what you are talking about, basically all JRPG's come down to the same thing.
change is overrated, and it often brings blind individuals that f***s up others without remorse. Like Nazis
anyway, Story in JRPG and WRPG both has their values.
JRPGs often NEEDS to be linear. Many of their stories are deep and complicated, but that's not all. They are also subtle. To give player's choice in that matter, would change many of their subtle touches and ruin the entire story. Eternal Sonata is good example. Change one thing in there, and give a choice to player in that game, and you simply might ruin that delicate story.
Also, JRPG does experiement many with stories. Even back in SNES era, when Western developers treated story like how porn director would, Star Ocean comes with interesting interaction method called Private Action, that allows you to interact with party members and show individualism and characteristics of each party members and your relationship with them.
Recently, Persona 3 managed to make interesting and unique story telling using social links.
Suikoden 3, also tried to use interesting story telling technique by telling stories in multiple parts and then allow the player to choose main character.
Dragon Quest V (? was it IV?) had hours of gameplay without main character even appearing. How unique is that?
Compared to this, most WRPG is just focused with creating a fantasy world that people tends to like (whether it is dragons and knight or sci-fi) and give you as much choice as possible, with less emphisis on creating unique story of their own. Mostly they use cliche plotline, but gives players plenty of choices to make it unique. KOTOR people said was unique and great, but in my eyes, it was quite predictable and rather plain and traditional.
Not all JRPG does story well, and at times their unique approach goes wrong direction often, but story alone are often interesting enough for people to seek for JRPGs. It's not even matter of how you tell the story, but story itself, is often unique and interesting. That almost never happens in WRPGs.
Gates of Oblivion is opening and you need to seek last remaining heir to the throne, is not summary of a story I'd be interested in.
Exploring the dream of Chopin in his moment of death, now that sounds unique and interesting story I'd like to give it a try.
That's the reason why JRPG will always have fans.
TriangleHard
Tons of WRPG's have party interaction and they do them far better than JRPG's ever will by allowing you to influence changes in your party members, unlocking side quests and opening tons of dialogue with them. Baldur's gate 1 & 2, Neverwinter Nights 1 & 2, Kotor 2, Mass Effect, Planescape Torment.
Freedom Force 1 & 2 lets you create a part the way you want and doesn't rely on a main character at all. It gives you the freedom to play with the characters you like in a 1950's comic book setting.
WRPG's cover all of the same themes as JRPG's do and even more. There's ones that deal with just vampires in a modern day setting (Vampire The Masquerade) Fantasy (so many to name) Sci Fi (Mass Effect, Kotor) Comic Books (Freedom Force, Marvel Ultimate Alliance), Current day spy (Obsidian's upcomming Alpha Protocol)
Once again making rash generalizations does nothing when WRPG's have matched everything that JRPG's have done and have sometimes even done things better.
Party interaction doesn't get any better than Neverwinter Nights 2, JRPG's will never offer an ounce of freedom like WRPG's do. In fact most gaming sites lately have been picking WRPG's for either RPG's of the year or story of the year. (I think last year Persona won RPG but Neverwinter Nights 2 won story)
So change isn't just for nazis (?!?!) it's for gaming also.
People quickly points out one thing and ignore others.
I mentioned party interaction because Star Ocean did it SNES era. Even back then JRPG showed different ways to tell the story better, and their efforts towards it.
Anyway, the WHOLE point of my post was WHY JRPG needs linear gameplay, and WRPG is allowed to have free-roaming gameplay.
JRPG is all about having a story, and TELLING that story as well as possible. That's why cut scenes are used, and any important part of the story, it is covered with more dynamic conversation that uses as much motion as words.
WRPG has different focus. Story is often used as another gameplay element. Their game is rarely focused on story itself, nor telling it. It is often how to PLAY the story itself. That's why it is rare to see WRPG going out of the limbs and taking their time to set up the mood to try to tell that story better.
Even recent WRPG like Mass Effect tells the story by static presentation of two characters facing each other and just talking. Rarely there is motion involved with telling the story, and often use words as primary factor (and often only factor) to tell the story.
I'm NOT saying one is better than other, it's just element of these two styles. I also can completely understand WRPG taking that approach since it is IMPOSSIBLE to show the delicate elements of story telling when giving so much freedom to the players. To portray that element, the story teller NEEDS the control, which is not easy in games because of players.
Both offer something different. If you don't like one, then don't bother playing it, but don't hate it because it doesn't fit your taste.
I happen to like both, although I do prefer JRPG. I think both are growing in their own ways and I like the seperate path they are taking.
Also one more thing.
WHO THE **** DECIDED CHOICE > LINEAR GAMEPLAY? That has to be stupidiest thing I've ever heard. Many books give you choices (if this turn page * if this turn page **), but that sure hasn't made things better and still linear and no choice novels sell much better. CHOICE IS NOT BETTER THAN LINEAR GAMEPLAY. It's just different, that's all.
Also one more thing.
WHO THE **** DECIDED CHOICE > LINEAR GAMEPLAY? That has to be stupidiest thing I've ever heard. Many books give you choices (if this turn page * if this turn page **), but that sure hasn't made things better and still linear and no choice novels sell much better. CHOICE IS NOT BETTER THAN LINEAR GAMEPLAY. It's just different, that's all.
TriangleHard
In role playing games, choice is better than linear gameplay. It's what pen and paper RPG's are based on and what the genre should try to emulate. The reason people still play D&D almost 40 years since it's been invented is because if offers them freedom that no other games do. It's the fundamental thing that sets RPG's from other games.
It's like saying you shouldn't play as athletes in sports games you should instead be the coach and watch the game...it's an interesting take but it shouldn't be something the sports genre tries to accomplish.
[QUOTE="TriangleHard"]Also one more thing.
WHO THE **** DECIDED CHOICE > LINEAR GAMEPLAY? That has to be stupidiest thing I've ever heard. Many books give you choices (if this turn page * if this turn page **), but that sure hasn't made things better and still linear and no choice novels sell much better. CHOICE IS NOT BETTER THAN LINEAR GAMEPLAY. It's just different, that's all.
smerlus
In role playing games, choice is better than linear gameplay. It's what pen and paper RPG's are based on and what the genre should try to emulate. The reason people still play D&D almost 40 years since it's been invented is because if offers them freedom that no other games do. It's the fundamental thing that sets RPG's from other games.
It's like saying you shouldn't play as athletes in sports games you should instead be the coach and watch the game...it's an interesting take but it shouldn't be something the sports genre tries to accomplish.
Choice is obviously not better because JRPGs still sell strong and many people love linear gameplay.
It is what the game offers, and they offer something different.
Just because choice is there, the experience of the game doesn't become better. People may still play D&D almost 40 years since it's been invented, but people still read Shakespeare after 400 years. Perfectly well told story is valuable, and reducing number of choices gives developers enough controls to make it happen.
Also your sports game comment is like this. Coloring book is better than Mona Lisa because YOU can actually color in it instead of just looking at it.
Just accept both forms as what they are. Why can't you just accept the difference and let it be? as much as there are people who prefer WRPG, there are people who prefer JRPG.
and if you want to argue, we can go deep into each aspects why which one is better, and never come to the end because both offer something good differently. Just accept the difference and move on. No matter how much you try to make it seem like WRPG is better due to choices, it will only make you look foolish and narrow-minded.
Choice is obviously not better because JRPGs still sell strong and many people love linear gameplay.
It is what the game offers, and they offer something different.
Just because choice is there, the experience of the game doesn't become better. People may still play D&D almost 40 years since it's been invented, but people still read Shakespeare after 400 years. Perfectly well told story is valuable, and reducing number of choices gives developers enough controls to make it happen.
Also your sports game comment is like this. Coloring book is better than Mona Lisa because YOU can actually color in it instead of just looking at it.
Just accept both forms as what they are. Why can't you just accept the difference and let it be? as much as there are people who prefer WRPG, there are people who prefer JRPG.
and if you want to argue, we can go deep into each aspects why which one is better, and never come to the end because both offer something good differently. Just accept the difference and move on. No matter how much you try to make it seem like WRPG is better due to choices, it will only make you look foolish and narrow-minded.
TriangleHard
Actually your coloring book analogy isn't even close to being right. JRPG's are like buying a coloring book and everything is already colored in for you.
JRPG's have no more roleplaying than GTA: SA or Blitz the League. In both of those games you are told who you are, you just change items and equipment and follow a story.
Your constant mentioning of good stories and all that is fine. I won't discredit Shakespeare but it seems you're missing the point. If I wanted a good RPG, I wouldn't read Shakespeare, I'd play a role playing game and use one of that game's adventures.
If I put Final Fantasy into a pen and paper RPG that would involve you and some friends coming to my house where I read a story to you, I'll already have the characters, story and everything made up for you. You don't get to pick who you attack or when you attack but just the kind of attack you want to do.
As you see one of these makes a good book, the other makes a good RPG.
War guns reality? You have no clue what you are talking about, basically all JRPG's come down to the same thing.
doyousmellthat
I do have a clue what I am talking about, thank you very much.
I think JRPGs just have that something that WRPGs just don't have. End of this story.
[QUOTE="TriangleHard"]
Choice is obviously not better because JRPGs still sell strong and many people love linear gameplay.
It is what the game offers, and they offer something different.
Just because choice is there, the experience of the game doesn't become better. People may still play D&D almost 40 years since it's been invented, but people still read Shakespeare after 400 years. Perfectly well told story is valuable, and reducing number of choices gives developers enough controls to make it happen.
Also your sports game comment is like this. Coloring book is better than Mona Lisa because YOU can actually color in it instead of just looking at it.
Just accept both forms as what they are. Why can't you just accept the difference and let it be? as much as there are people who prefer WRPG, there are people who prefer JRPG.
and if you want to argue, we can go deep into each aspects why which one is better, and never come to the end because both offer something good differently. Just accept the difference and move on. No matter how much you try to make it seem like WRPG is better due to choices, it will only make you look foolish and narrow-minded.
smerlus
Actually your coloring book analogy isn't even close to being right. JRPG's are like buying a coloring book and everything is already colored in for you.
JRPG's have no more roleplaying than GTA: SA or Blitz the League. In both of those games you are told who you are, you just change items and equipment and follow a story.
Your constant mentioning of good stories and all that is fine. I won't discredit Shakespeare but it seems you're missing the point. If I wanted a good RPG, I wouldn't read Shakespeare, I'd play a role playing game and use one of that game's adventures.
If I put Final Fantasy into a pen and paper RPG that would involve you and some friends coming to my house where I read a story to you, I'll already have the characters, story and everything made up for you. You don't get to pick who you attack or when you attack but just the kind of attack you want to do.
As you see one of these makes a good book, the other makes a good RPG.
Well the thing is that is is not a book, but a game.
and traditionally, RPGs has been made with linear storyline. People just called it RPG because it described the style best back in the days.
If you want to deny JRPG being RPGs, fine that's ok. Call it turned based adventure or something.
The point is, JRPG is in no way inferior to WRPG and does it's purpose as game equally or better than WRPG, which is to provided entertainment to the players.
Also, I guess that means KOTOR isn't RPG as well. It comes with characters, story and everything made up for me. The choices in that game is rather limited to the point it is not much different with JRPG.
Well, if you go down to word for word definition of Role Playing Game, it does make WRPG more of an RPG, but it has nothing to do with quality of game.
@ PlaWeird: Would you please put some more depth to your statments? Right now you have things spelled out for you and the only response we get out of you is "No, youre wrong". You say you do know what you are talking about, well then tell us. Give us proper examples of how WRPG's are nothing more than gun focused games. Youre judging an entire genre based on 2 games, yet you havent even told us which two games it was.
@ TriangleHard: The main difference between JRPG's and WRPG's is character development and character interaction. Yes the story telling is different too, but I would not go as far to say that JRPG's have better stories because WRPG's lack a proper storyline. Your comparisons to Shakespear and the Mona Lisa..............although rather pretenious if you ask me, is probably closer than you realize. A JRPG is really nothing more than playing an interactive storybook. Now I realize that this really applies to most games. This is where WRPG's try to differ, they try to make the player feel immersed in the gameplay. Instead of the usual you are this class, you can only use these weapons, you only get this 1 X skill at X level. This is probably why .hack was such a terrible game, it was a JPRG that tried to present itself as a WRPG but failed horribly. You see players like choice, they dont like to be force fed all the game information. Again I know nearly all the games out there are like this, however in JRPG's its a stronger feeling because thats what a JRPG is based on. Force feeding players pre-rendered information.
Look Im not here to criticize you on what you like or dont like. I like what I like and you like what you like, and Im happy to accept that. But this notion that JRPG's are for the more civilized, higher intelligant folk while WRPG's are more for the common man that is beneath you isnt gonna fly here.
Ahhh, yet another J vs W fight! :)
Before I enter the fray I think we ought to lay out some ground rules, for the sake of making this duel more...gentlmanly.
First off, everyone should declare which games of the opposing continent they have actually played. It's pretty bloody (no, I don't consider that an oxymoron) pointless to present a grand tirade against an entire genre based on say...Bauldur's Gate: Dark Alliance. Lets all get this out there now.
Secondly don't invoke the fricking Mona Lisa! I mean, do you actually like the painting that much? Do you know anyone who loves art who considers her to be better then any Rembrandt or Goya or even Da Vinchi's other works? If you do then know I mean no offence, but otherwise I must kindly ask you to cast out your not un-false pretention and get on with it! :twisted:
I'd like to start off by saying that JRPGs as a genre deserve to be bashed. Now don't misunderstand me, I've really enjoyed my fair share of JRPGs from Square, Camelot, Level 5 etc. but regardless of that it is pretty damn clear that the genre is holding itself back via it's own conventions. Once again, I've played Golden Sun, Kingdom Hearts, Final Fantasy [insert roman numeral], Dark Cloud, Chrono Trigger etc. and while they're not all bad and sometimes excelent, it would be a really good idea to abolish battle screens, give the player some more sidequests before getting to the final stage and give me some weapons that don't just get replaced by the next set I buy at the next town.
WRPGs don't get off scot free either. To be fair, the best WRPGs do have technically superior gameplay to any of the JRPGs I've played (i.e. no town/city in any JRPG I've played compares to the real Baldur's Gate), but I can not deny that WRPGs suffer from a stylistic genericness that JRPGs often rise above. For instance, there is barely any WRPG music that I find to be truely memorable. Yes, I loved that dragon battle music as much as you did but I've never found myself just sitting there playing the game for the sake of taking in the sound of the world like I did with FFX (sadly though, that game only allows you to experience its beauty once you get far enough to turn off random battles and explore as you want).
I'll leave this thread for now and let it to froth and boil over.
May the best Rocket Propelled Grenade win!
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment