Which Japanese property should have Western development?

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"]they are on rails games...they are not true TPS in the way we use the term today. I originally said more focus on shooter combat in an earlier post...the "action heavy" comes from the change in direction as well.IronBass

It was 1983 and 1988, of course they aren't 3D TPS as they are now, that's kinda obvious, isn't it?

The concept is exactly the same though. Third person perspective, shoot whatever moves.

and I am talking about modern FPS and TPS...which RE4 got its style from....not run and gun arcade shooters.texasgoldrush

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"] I am using today's term for "shooter"...which is a genre. The one rooted from Wolfenstien 3d.IronBass

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"]and I am talking about modern FPS and TPS...which RE4 got its style from....not run and gun arcade shooters.IronBass

However, today they are called "platformers", not "shooters". There is a differenc ebetween a game like Gradius and Contra to a game like Doom and Quake.texasgoldrush

so modern TPS has you on rails?texasgoldrush

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"]However, today they are called "platformers", not "shooters". There is a differenc ebetween a game like Gradius and Contra to a game like Doom and Quake.IronBass

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"]so modern TPS has you on rails?IronBass

"Run n' Gun" is th emost accurate term....they are far from TPS's we have today....which can be rooted back to a Doom and Wolfenstien philospohy as well.texasgoldrush

They are not far, at all. People compare Gears of War to Contra, Vanquish to plenty of SHMUPS. Why? Because, regardless of perspective, the core remains the same. How you name them is irrelevant. The principle and core mechanics are the same.

but then they are on rails and have no exploration or thinking of combat outside the joystick and the fire button.texasgoldrush

Irrelevant. The point was about Japanese shooting games, not about exploration or thinking (something TPS these days don't excel at, either). That has already been proved.

Actually, the original point was about action and shooter focus per se, regardless of perspective. It has already been proved thatshooting, in whatever perspective, it's not a Western quality.

Resident Evil 4 was a great game. Unfortunately, it has left Resident Evil in a position where it is no longer anything remarkable or special. And the more "Japanese" game that was left behind? It's place still hasn't been refilled.

If you want more stagnation in the industry, a lack of diversity, and the input from people of different cultural persuasions, then by all means, advocate the collapse of the Japanese industry in favor of the west using their IPs.

Because, after all, nothing indicates confidence in the western gaming industrymore than suggesting that they build off of Japanese intellectual properties.

I'd like Bioware to have control over the Final Fantasy and Frictional Games to have control over Silent Hill.

Vesica_Prime

BioWare have control of Final Fantasy? :lol:

Those guys lost control of Mass Effect with one sequel and you want them to work on Final Fantasy? I'm guessing they'll probably decide to make it a streamlined and linear game that.... WAIT A SECOND! THAT'S JUST LIKE MASS EFFECT 2! You mean Final Fantasy XIII and Mass Effect 2 have the same basic design but ME2 gets all the praise and FF13 gets all the flack? I just don't get the internet anymore..... So FF13 did what JRPGs typically do: be linear, but got criticized for not being open-ended, while Mass Effect 2 decided to be a linear game that.... earned praise for being open-ended? Wut?

Sorry, not BioWare. If Square-Enix were to give FF to a Western team I would hope for maybe Blizzard or Obsidian. Blizzard have the whole polish thing down and know how to bust out some fancy cinematics, Obsidian on the other hand know how to stay true to something's design as well as put out good stories even if they're a glitchy bunch.

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"] "Run n' Gun" is th emost accurate term....they are far from TPS's we have today....which can be rooted back to a Doom and Wolfenstien philospohy as well.IronBass

They are not far, at all. People compare Gears of War to Contra, Vanquish to plenty of SHMUPS. Why? Because, regardless of perspective, the core remains the same. How you name them is irrelevant. The principle and core mechanics are the same.

but then they are on rails and have no exploration or thinking of combat outside the joystick and the fire button.texasgoldrush

Irrelevant. The point was about Japanese shooting games, not about exploration or thinking (something TPS these days don't excel at, either). That has already been proved.

Actually, the original point was about action and shooter focus per se, regardless of perspective. It has already been proved thatshooting, in whatever perspective, it's not a Western quality.

[QUOTE="Vesica_Prime"]

I'd like Bioware to have control over the Final Fantasy and Frictional Games to have control over Silent Hill.

BioWare have control of Final Fantasy? :lol:

Those guys lost control of Mass Effect with one sequel and you want them to work on Final Fantasy? I'm guessing they'll probably decide to make it a streamlined and linear game that.... WAIT A SECOND! THAT'S JUST LIKE MASS EFFECT 2! You mean Final Fantasy XIII and Mass Effect 2 have the same basic design but ME2 gets all the praise and FF13 gets all the flack? I just don't get the internet anymore..... So FF13 did what JRPGs typically do: be linear, but got criticized for not being open-ended, while Mass Effect 2 decided to be a linear game that.... earned praise for being open-ended? Wut?

Sorry, not BioWare. If Square-Enix were to give FF to a Western team I would hope for maybe Blizzard or Obsidian. Blizzard have the whole polish thing down and know how to bust out some fancy cinematics, Obsidian on the other hand know how to stay true to something's design as well as put out good stories even if they're a glitchy bunch.

[QUOTE="NeonNinja"]

[QUOTE="Vesica_Prime"]

I'd like Bioware to have control over the Final Fantasy and Frictional Games to have control over Silent Hill.

texasgoldrush

BioWare have control of Final Fantasy? :lol:

Those guys lost control of Mass Effect with one sequel and you want them to work on Final Fantasy? I'm guessing they'll probably decide to make it a streamlined and linear game that.... WAIT A SECOND! THAT'S JUST LIKE MASS EFFECT 2! You mean Final Fantasy XIII and Mass Effect 2 have the same basic design but ME2 gets all the praise and FF13 gets all the flack? I just don't get the internet anymore..... So FF13 did what JRPGs typically do: be linear, but got criticized for not being open-ended, while Mass Effect 2 decided to be a linear game that.... earned praise for being open-ended? Wut?

Sorry, not BioWare. If Square-Enix were to give FF to a Western team I would hope for maybe Blizzard or Obsidian. Blizzard have the whole polish thing down and know how to bust out some fancy cinematics, Obsidian on the other hand know how to stay true to something's design as well as put out good stories even if they're a glitchy bunch.

You're right. It's better. A lot better.

Your missing the point...I am not talking about games that let you shoot things, I am talking about a particular style, that RE4 uses, that has Western roots. The type of shooter that is like Doom and Quake, where you explore the area (sometimes for combat purposes more than finding things). Modern TPS's are really FPS that took a third person view. They are different from their arcade roots. However, GeoW can be compared to Contra becuase of its setting, not its gamplay.texasgoldrush

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"][QUOTE="NeonNinja"]

BioWare have control of Final Fantasy? :lol:

Those guys lost control of Mass Effect with one sequel and you want them to work on Final Fantasy? I'm guessing they'll probably decide to make it a streamlined and linear game that.... WAIT A SECOND! THAT'S JUST LIKE MASS EFFECT 2! You mean Final Fantasy XIII and Mass Effect 2 have the same basic design but ME2 gets all the praise and FF13 gets all the flack? I just don't get the internet anymore..... So FF13 did what JRPGs typically do: be linear, but got criticized for not being open-ended, while Mass Effect 2 decided to be a linear game that.... earned praise for being open-ended? Wut?

Sorry, not BioWare. If Square-Enix were to give FF to a Western team I would hope for maybe Blizzard or Obsidian. Blizzard have the whole polish thing down and know how to bust out some fancy cinematics, Obsidian on the other hand know how to stay true to something's design as well as put out good stories even if they're a glitchy bunch.

You're right. It's better. A lot better.

[QUOTE="hakanakumono"]

Resident Evil 4 was a great game. Unfortunately, it has left Resident Evil in a position where it is no longer anything remarkable or special. And the more "Japanese" game that was left behind? It's place still hasn't been refilled.

If you want more stagnation in the industry, a lack of diversity, and the input from people of different cultural persuasions, then by all means, advocate the collapse of the Japanese industry in favor of the west using their IPs.

Because, after all, nothing indicates confidence in the western gaming industrymore than suggesting that they build off of Japanese intellectual properties.

texasgoldrush

If the Japanese industry produces nothing then it does not exist.

The Japanese industry is in trouble because of higher costs. It was already struggling due to higher costs last generation. If "innovation" were to inspire success, Valkyria Chronicles would be receiving console sequels right now. As far as Japan being in trouble because of releasing games like Dragon Quest and Pokemon, these IPs are extremely successful. If games like Resident Evil 4 have taught us anything, it's that reducing variety in the industry to what appeals to the greatest majority is where the industry is headed. Your position is a threat to your own principles.

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"]Your missing the point...I am not talking about games that let you shoot things, I am talking about a particular style, that RE4 uses, that has Western roots. The type of shooter that is like Doom and Quake, where you explore the area (sometimes for combat purposes more than finding things). Modern TPS's are really FPS that took a third person view. They are different from their arcade roots. However, GeoW can be compared to Contra becuase of its setting, not its gamplay.IronBass

I declare this thread the Holy Church of Globalization. All Japanese may hereby paint their faces white as not to offend "the Globe" also known as "the West."

sarcasm mods, sarcasm

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"]

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"] Becuase ME2 IS open ended. Sure the missions aren't...but I get to choose not only the order I do them, but if I do them at all. Some have a decision that affects the mission as well. During missions, its highly linear, outside of missions, its one of Bioware's most open games they have ever created. Obsidian is hit or miss....Alpha Protocols story sucked, and KOTOR II is not as good as KOTOR I storywise.texasgoldrush

You're right. It's better. A lot better.

[I am not debating the concept of shooting, I am debating the STYLE of shooting. It is true that both the East and the West have influenced eachother, but thats not the point of this topic (it is in a way that I think games of some Japanese franchises should be attempted by Western studios)....the point is that the Japanese industry has fallen behind, an dmust find ways to adjust to the concept of globalization. The West has, the Japanese haven't.texasgoldrush

Most of your arguments have been met with negativity (those subjective) or corrected (those objective, like RE4's influences, or game sales).

Don't take me wrong, I respect you view and all, but besides your opinion you have not really proved anything about either market.

[QUOTE="IronBass"][QUOTE="texasgoldrush"]Your missing the point...I am not talking about games that let you shoot things, I am talking about a particular style, that RE4 uses, that has Western roots. The type of shooter that is like Doom and Quake, where you explore the area (sometimes for combat purposes more than finding things). Modern TPS's are really FPS that took a third person view. They are different from their arcade roots. However, GeoW can be compared to Contra becuase of its setting, not its gamplay.texasgoldrush

I find it terribly ironic that you're using a Japanese game that inspired western games to follow in its footsteps as an example of Japan being a good little country and bowing down to the west's vastly superior sensibilities.

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"][I am not debating the concept of shooting, I am debating the STYLE of shooting. It is true that both the East and the West have influenced eachother, but thats not the point of this topic (it is in a way that I think games of some Japanese franchises should be attempted by Western studios)....the point is that the Japanese industry has fallen behind, an dmust find ways to adjust to the concept of globalization. The West has, the Japanese haven't.IronBass

and you have not corrrected me on game sales, I corrected you.texasgoldrush

You didn't. You said SMAS was bundled, which it wasn't (that was the +Mario World version, not counted), and that MK64 and Goldeneye "were close", which doesn't really mean much.

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"][QUOTE="IronBass"] The point is simply, shooting is as Japanese as is Western. The roots are irrelevant, since every genre has evolved thanks to both markets to the point that it doesn't matter anymore where they started. Nothing indicates that RE4 action focus is a Western influence.hakanakumono

I find it terribly ironic that you're using a Japanese game that inspired western games to follow in its footsteps as an example of Japan being a good little country and bowing down to the west's vastly superior sensibilities.

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"]and you have not corrrected me on game sales, I corrected you.IronBass

You didn't. You said SMAS was bundled, which it wasn't (that was the +Mario World version, not counted), and that MK64 and Goldeneye "were close", which doesn't really mean much.

[QUOTE="hakanakumono"]

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"] I am not debating the concept of shooting, I am debating the STYLE of shooting. It is true that both the East and the West have influenced eachother, but thats not the point of this topic (it is in a way that I think games of some Japanese franchises should be attempted by Western studios)....the point is that the Japanese industry has fallen behind, an dmust find ways to adjust to the concept of globalization. The West has, the Japanese haven't.texasgoldrush

I find it terribly ironic that you're using a Japanese game that inspired western games to follow in its footsteps as an example of Japan being a good little country and bowing down to the west's vastly superior sensibilities.

Yes, the notion that Japan has had no culture of its own since World War 2 devastated their country is hardly "PC" and also extremely offensive.

it counts and still, it has not outsold DKC. The only title to do so is Mario World.texasgoldrush

"It counts" as what? The sales of SMAS, the retail not-bundled version, without SMW, outsold DKC.

[QUOTE="NeonNinja"]

[QUOTE="Vesica_Prime"]

I'd like Bioware to have control over the Final Fantasy and Frictional Games to have control over Silent Hill.

texasgoldrush

BioWare have control of Final Fantasy? :lol:

Those guys lost control of Mass Effect with one sequel and you want them to work on Final Fantasy? I'm guessing they'll probably decide to make it a streamlined and linear game that.... WAIT A SECOND! THAT'S JUST LIKE MASS EFFECT 2! You mean Final Fantasy XIII and Mass Effect 2 have the same basic design but ME2 gets all the praise and FF13 gets all the flack? I just don't get the internet anymore..... So FF13 did what JRPGs typically do: be linear, but got criticized for not being open-ended, while Mass Effect 2 decided to be a linear game that.... earned praise for being open-ended? Wut?

Sorry, not BioWare. If Square-Enix were to give FF to a Western team I would hope for maybe Blizzard or Obsidian. Blizzard have the whole polish thing down and know how to bust out some fancy cinematics, Obsidian on the other hand know how to stay true to something's design as well as put out good stories even if they're a glitchy bunch.

Oh, right. I must have missed that portion of Final Fantasy XIII in Gran Pulse that saw me put in around 65 hours there (with the other 15 being the linear beginning) where I had missions where I could choose to either do them, ignore them, what order to do them etc. Granted all of these missions are monster hunts/fights etc, but the fact remains that I can do them if I want to and even select the order I do them in.

Sure, a game with dialogue choices will have more of an edge in how a mission turns out, like if I choose to kill Samara or the Ardat Yakshi (I don't remember her name since she's dead now). The thing is, the whole game is linearly designed. It's a corridor shooter in design. Doom's levels were more open-ended than Mass Effect 2's missions. If I'm going to praise it because I can choose to do Jacob's loyalty mission but ignore Legion's loyalty mission just because that counts as open-ended? The way you level up is streamlined. The way you fight is streamlined. The level design is streamlined. So what if I can decide from a menu where to go, it's still a linear game through and through. I heard all of this ridiculous praise for Mass Effect 2 and it seemed like such a safe bet considering how fantastic the original is, and then I end up with a game that lacks direction in plot, cuts corners for various things rather than trying to improve them and to top it all off features the same type of level design in the campaign as Call of Duty. No wonder it earned so much praise. It's a dumbed down, linear mess. But a series known for being linear like Final Fantasy goes and gets criticized because it stays true to the genre? This is one of those things that I just don't understand and it still doesn't make sense to me. Oh well, to each their own I guess.

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"]

[QUOTE="hakanakumono"]

I find it terribly ironic that you're using a Japanese game that inspired western games to follow in its footsteps as an example of Japan being a good little country and bowing down to the west's vastly superior sensibilities.

Yes, the notion that Japan has had no culture of its own since World War 2 devastated their country is hardly "PC" and also extremely offensive.

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"]it counts and still, it has not outsold DKC. The only title to do so is Mario World.IronBass

"It counts" as what? The sales of SMAS, the retail not-bundled version, without SMW, outsold DKC.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dkctexasgoldrush

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"][QUOTE="NeonNinja"]

BioWare have control of Final Fantasy? :lol:

Those guys lost control of Mass Effect with one sequel and you want them to work on Final Fantasy? I'm guessing they'll probably decide to make it a streamlined and linear game that.... WAIT A SECOND! THAT'S JUST LIKE MASS EFFECT 2! You mean Final Fantasy XIII and Mass Effect 2 have the same basic design but ME2 gets all the praise and FF13 gets all the flack? I just don't get the internet anymore..... So FF13 did what JRPGs typically do: be linear, but got criticized for not being open-ended, while Mass Effect 2 decided to be a linear game that.... earned praise for being open-ended? Wut?

Sorry, not BioWare. If Square-Enix were to give FF to a Western team I would hope for maybe Blizzard or Obsidian. Blizzard have the whole polish thing down and know how to bust out some fancy cinematics, Obsidian on the other hand know how to stay true to something's design as well as put out good stories even if they're a glitchy bunch.

Oh, right. I must have missed that portion of Final Fantasy XIII in Gran Pulse that saw me put in around 65 hours there (with the other 15 being the linear beginning) where I had missions where I could choose to either do them, ignore them, what order to do them etc. Granted all of these missions are monster hunts/fights etc, but the fact remains that I can do them if I want to and even select the order I do them in.

Sure, a game with dialogue choices will have more of an edge in how a mission turns out, like if I choose to kill Samara or the Ardat Yakshi (I don't remember her name since she's dead now). The thing is, the whole game is linearly designed. It's a corridor shooter in design. Doom's levels were more open-ended than Mass Effect 2's missions. If I'm going to praise it because I can choose to do Jacob's loyalty mission but ignore Legion's loyalty mission just because that counts as open-ended? The way you level up is streamlined. The way you fight is streamlined. The level design is streamlined. So what if I can decide from a menu where to go, it's still a linear game through and through. I heard all of this ridiculous praise for Mass Effect 2 and it seemed like such a safe bet considering how fantastic the original is, and then I end up with a game that lacks direction in plot, cuts corners for various things rather than trying to improve them and to top it all off features the same type of level design in the campaign as Call of Duty. No wonder it earned so much praise. It's a dumbed down, linear mess. But a series known for being linear like Final Fantasy goes and gets criticized because it stays true to the genre? This is one of those things that I just don't understand and it still doesn't make sense to me. Oh well, to each their own I guess.

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DkcIronBass

[QUOTE="hakanakumono"]

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"] and Japanese games, especially in the 80's have been inspired by our movies and media....Rambo and Top Gun for instance. And really, dropping the PC BS, Japan has, after we turned their country into an ashpile 70 years ago. Really Japanese modern culture is based of the West.

texasgoldrush

Yes, the notion that Japan has had no culture of its own since World War 2 devastated their country is hardly "PC" and also extremely offensive.

Being based upon something and being influenced by something are two entirely different things. Japan did not simply began to be influenced by the west post WW2 either.

Because SMAS is a pack in. It was packed into the 1994 version of the SNES.texasgoldrush

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"]Because SMAS is a pack in. It was packed into the 1994 version of the SNES.IronBass

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"][QUOTE="hakanakumono"]

Yes, the notion that Japan has had no culture of its own since World War 2 devastated their country is hardly "PC" and also extremely offensive.

Being based upon something and being influenced by something are two entirely different things. Japan did not simply began to be influenced by the west post WW2 either.

still its a factor as the SNES sold a ton in 1994.texasgoldrush

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"] still its a factor as the SNES sold a ton in 1994.IronBass

[QUOTE="hakanakumono"]

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"] it has a culture of its own, however, you cannot doubt the Western infleunce.....hell look at their love for baseball, a US sport. Japan, South Korea, and Hong Kong clearly have many values of the West and that cannot be denied.texasgoldrush

Being based upon something and being influenced by something are two entirely different things. Japan did not simply began to be influenced by the west post WW2 either.

And why do you say that?

its still a pack in game and wikipedia treated it as such.texasgoldrush

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"][QUOTE="hakanakumono"]

Being based upon something and being influenced by something are two entirely different things. Japan did not simply began to be influenced by the west post WW2 either.

hakanakumono

And why do you say that?

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"]its still a pack in game and wikipedia treated it as such.IronBass

[QUOTE="hakanakumono"]

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"] True, the West's influence of Japan occured long before WWII, however, nothing was more influential than the US Occupation after WWII.texasgoldrush

And why do you say that?

Are you suggesting that prior to the occupation, Japan did not have a government system based on the west? What was preventing Japan from becoming a "respected power" prior to that?

Even if SMAS was on the same cart as SMW, it still counts as a pack in...it is just factually incorrect to say otherwise.texasgoldrush

SMAS, the game whose sales I'm talking about, was never bundled.

SMAS+SMW (yes, different name, registry code, etc) was bundled.

I won't repeat this again, because I've already said it 4 times, and I think that should be enough.

[QUOTE="NeonNinja"]

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"] Becuase ME2 IS open ended. Sure the missions aren't...but I get to choose not only the order I do them, but if I do them at all. Some have a decision that affects the mission as well. During missions, its highly linear, outside of missions, its one of Bioware's most open games they have ever created. Obsidian is hit or miss....Alpha Protocols story sucked, and KOTOR II is not as good as KOTOR I storywise.texasgoldrush

Oh, right. I must have missed that portion of Final Fantasy XIII in Gran Pulse that saw me put in around 65 hours there (with the other 15 being the linear beginning) where I had missions where I could choose to either do them, ignore them, what order to do them etc. Granted all of these missions are monster hunts/fights etc, but the fact remains that I can do them if I want to and even select the order I do them in.

Sure, a game with dialogue choices will have more of an edge in how a mission turns out, like if I choose to kill Samara or the Ardat Yakshi (I don't remember her name since she's dead now). The thing is, the whole game is linearly designed. It's a corridor shooter in design. Doom's levels were more open-ended than Mass Effect 2's missions. If I'm going to praise it because I can choose to do Jacob's loyalty mission but ignore Legion's loyalty mission just because that counts as open-ended? The way you level up is streamlined. The way you fight is streamlined. The level design is streamlined. So what if I can decide from a menu where to go, it's still a linear game through and through. I heard all of this ridiculous praise for Mass Effect 2 and it seemed like such a safe bet considering how fantastic the original is, and then I end up with a game that lacks direction in plot, cuts corners for various things rather than trying to improve them and to top it all off features the same type of level design in the campaign as Call of Duty. No wonder it earned so much praise. It's a dumbed down, linear mess. But a series known for being linear like Final Fantasy goes and gets criticized because it stays true to the genre? This is one of those things that I just don't understand and it still doesn't make sense to me. Oh well, to each their own I guess.

First off, yes, monster fights vs storyline is different, which is why I made specific mention that despite my defense of FF13's open nature all of the missions were monster fights. I didn't hold that back. However, the difference between FF13's missions and Mass Effect 2's missions are trivial at best. The real difference is that ME2's missions tell some form of a story while FF13's missions serve as gameplay. However, in the end both games' missions follow a similar structure. You travel through an area, killing enemies to reach a certain objective. In the end, not so different, right? But FF13 still retains the same level of openness that you praised for ME2 when it comes to mission structure, even if they aren't a part of the story (well, technically they are a part of the backstory, but they don't affect the main plot).

Streamlining isn't bad, but oversimplification is. That's what happened in the transition from Mass Effect to Mass Effect 2. The level design is not like the first game. When I landed on the Citadel in Mass Effect it was this wide place that I could explore. Same deal with Feros and Noveria. Those places to explore in Mass Effect 2 are gone. Omega is basically a nightclub, the new Citadel is essentially there for a few shops. You can't explore anywhere. When I mention open-ended design I'm not saying that Mass Effect 1 had these grand, sweeping combat arenas, but it was a much better developed game. If I landed on Feros it wasn't just some linear romp for 20 minutes that I would do and never return to, Feros became a destination, a four hour chunk of the game that let me play and explore new areas. Mass Effect was open-ended, Mass Effect 2 is not open-ended.

As far as being character-centric. I agree with you to an extent. As there are 11 or so characters in the game, many of them being new, they need to be explored a bit. Unfortunately all characters followed a set pattern. You would recruit them. Then you would talk with them. From there they would refuse to speak with you until the time for their loyalty mission came, then you would do that, then they would speak with you and all of a sudden you're given the heads up that you can now use the Omega 4 Relay. The characters were not all fleshed out enough (some were, but not all). If anything, ME1 had more fleshed out characters because you practically gathered your party together at the beginning of the game and then you could interact with them constantly and see them change as you progressed through the game. Sure beats constantly hearing "Again? No offense commander but I'm not big on forcing these talks" everytime I try to talk to one of my team-members.

As far as the streamlining between ME2 and FF13, I disagree, though it's a matter of opinion. Final Fantasy 13 streamlined the design of the game to properly tell its plot of refugees on the run from the government. On the other hand, I'm trying to figure out why Mass Effect 2 was so streamlined in comparison to the first. It was unnecessary in my opinion.

[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"][QUOTE="hakanakumono"]

And why do you say that?

Are you suggesting that prior to the occupation, Japan did not have a government system based on the west? What was preventing Japan from becoming a "respected power" prior to that?