I did a little more research on how people name certain Japanese made games as RPGs when they are not and it came to me. This has to be stupidiest mistake ever, it's in the same realm as calling Native Americans "Indians." I shall call them JNSCs from now on. If you people have a brain, you would stop calling them RPGs, enlighten yourselves.2deluxe
Well, you are certainly free to call them whatever you like, based on your opinions of the games. But having read so many of your agitated and increasingly argumentative posts on this lately, I think it'd be less stressful for you (and probably for the rest of us) if you learn to accept that most people don't happen to agree with your opinion on this. That goes not just for gamers, but obviously also for gaming media, developers, and the whole industry, all of whom do consider these games to be a type of RPG.
You need to broaden your perspecive a little, or at least come to grips with the fact that not all of us have the limited view you seem to. There are a lot of different genres of games, and a lot of different types and sub-genres, within those genres. Whether you choose to try to divide RPGs by Western/Japanese, or (more accurately in my opinion) by PC/Console style, having a preference for one type doesn't mean that the other type can be disregarded as an RPG, simply because it's a different type.
I've played RPGs of all kinds and types for the better part of 25 years. AD&D with maps and dice, most every Ultima released on the old Atari/Amiga computers, the Gold Box games from SSI and TSR, most of the Might & Magic series, both Baldur's Gate runs, the Elder Scrolls series since Daggerfall, and lots of others from Dungeon Master to Fallout, from Arcanum to Planescape: Torment. I've spent way too many hours in MMORPG's including Asheron's Call, the original EverQuest, SWG, and EQ II, which I'm still playing. Console RPGs are comparatively new to me, as I've only been playing them for about the last 5-6 years, compared to all those years of computer RPGs (both PC and earlier). But I've been enjoying the various types of RPGs in the PS2 (and PS1) library as much as I enjoyed the traditional PC-style RPGs.
There are certainly differences between most RPGs with a PC heritage, and those which are console based, but the truth is there are huge differences within all the various RPGs just on the PC alone. And there are huge differences among all the myriad RPGs available on consoles. Games that you'd like to group all together as "Western" can cover the whole spectrum -- from totally open-ended gameplay with a character or party custom created from scratch, to games which are just as limited, linear, and constrained by pre-determined characters and plot as any of their console counterparts. I'll certainly agree that there is very little on the console RPG side which is as open-ended and player-determined as some of the most traditional PC stype RPGs, notably things like Daggerfall. But that doesn't mean that only they can be called RPGs, even though that seems to be your opinion.
These things are all RPGs, they're simply different kinds. You seem not to agree with this or accept anything that doesn't fall within the strict parameters you prefer, and that's fine. But that's really just your opinion. You're definitely entitled to it, but you might want to consider whether it's really worth constantly trying to pick an argument with your fellow gamers -- in a console gaming forum no less -- about one of the most popular and successful genres of games for that console. And you might want to think about doing so in a less insulting manner, regardless. I assure you that a lot of us do have a brain, and probably at least as much gaming expertise and experience as you do. We just happen to have a different opinion -- and apparently somewhat broader gaming horizons -- than you do.
Log in to comment