IGN: Top 10 Ways to fix JRPG's

[Xno Kappa]

We're talking about easily identifiable categories of games that play a certain way. Not the semantics behind the meaning of the term "JRPG", "WRPG", or just "RPG" in general.

[Kuya]

ITT: semantics is perceived by the general public as a derogatory term used to refer to useless arguments even though semantics is the fundamental means for which to obtain knowledge of a specific subject.

Meaning, no true argument can be established without specific definitions, if there are none, there is no argument, just idiots babbling. So the term "this is just a semantics debate" is pretty much only uttered by dimwits.

[Xno Kappa]

Then there's obviously no argument here since the article can be applied to almost any game within several genre. Leaving this whole debate of "JRPG means this versus JRPG means that" indeed, an issue based on nothing but opinions and preferences.

[Kuya]

And thus the point BRP always tries to make about the fabled RPG. It is a conveniant term for say, conveying to someone else what you like in less words, assuming the other person knows the term, but no argument can be had with it because its definition was never logically constructed.

[Xno Kappa]

Except he presents his opinions as facts to a definition that doesn't exist along with his preference in what mechanics of the game can only be allowed to qualify for said genre. Thus the accusations of trolling.

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

If you haven't truly experienced an RPG, then I suggest a visit to the fabled Midlantia...

http://www.laire.com/photoalbum/data...esistance2.JPG

[Araelus]

the laconic nature of Kuya is better than my talk talk talk

And thus the point BRP always tries to make about the fabled RPG. It is a conveniant term for say, conveying to someone else what you like in less words, assuming the other person knows the term, but no argument can be had with it because its definition was never logically constructed.

TL;DR: How much can you mess with the recipe before that tasty cake becomes a loaf of bread?

We're talking about easily identifiable categories of games that play a certain way. Not the semantics behind the meaning of the term "JRPG", "WRPG", or just "RPG" in general.

Isn't the point of the discussion that two games can be very different and still be called the same type of _RPG?

FFI and FFXII play completely differently. Are both are JRPGs? (Yes.)

Valkyrie Profile 2 and Valkyria Chronicles have partially real-time combat. Are they both JRPGs? (No.)

Oblivion is fantasy setting and Fallout 3 is scifi. Are both WRPGs? (Yes.)

Metal Gear Solid 4 and Modern Warfare 2 both have a linear plot and guns. MGS4 puts you in the role of a single character. MW2 has levels and experience points. Is either a WRPG? (No.)

Beckwin's comment earlier addresses the heart of the matter:

the subgenre distinction here is regionally based, yet there are definitely some recognizable traits very common throughout games from their respective regions. aesthetics, themes, character stat progression, largely exclusive handfuls of basic battle styles, etc. However it's important to recognize that many games will not meet all criteria for their region, but that doesn't necessarily make them not JRPGs/WRPGs.

I completely agree.

Games up for debate are mostly clumps of necessary but not sufficient conditions for being JRPGs or WRPGs or so on. If we can clearly point out the sufficient conditions then it puts an end to the idea of "fixing" certain aspects of the games because changing said aspects would switch the genre, not merely "improve" games in the genre.

So long as people debate whether a particular is good or bad it's a never-ending aesthetic argument. We might be able to say all JRPGs have [Q property] and all WRPGs have [M property] and no one game can have both Q and M.

Let me list some things all _RPG have:

• the player controls a character or party in a detailed setting and makes choices as to how those people will act(well that's almost any game)
• levels, experience points (present in FPS)
• plot events alter the gameworld somehow(again, most games, urgh)
• puzzle or platform elements are not the main focus but might appear as minigames

Doesn't seem to be getting me anywhere. What about:

• player's goal is to complete a storyline

In a fighting game your goal is to win bouts, in a flight sim you have mission objectives, in an adventure game there is a world to explore, in a racing game you have to get the fastest time, in a strategy game you defeat the other armies,

All of these games probably have a storyline, a setting that changes based on what the player does (or it would not be interactive), and some kind of avatar for the player (even if it is a cursor in a RTS). But in both JRPGs and WRPGs it appears the point of buying and playing the game is to go through a story.

In FFVI you fight monsters and explore a world - is that the main goal? Would we be comfortable with only that portion of the game? Doesn't that hypothetical remind you of the problem with Fallout 2 vs. Fallout 3?

The point of tabletop RPGs was to experience a story by being immersed in it. The point of _RPGs is to emulate that experience in a different medium to some extent.

So is there an essence to a JRPG? Can we take things away from a game and find the division between JRPG and not-JRPG? I don't want to go down the road of emergent qualities, so the inference to best explanation I'll offer is that "JRPG" is a certain aesthetic set of video games which include, in addition to the game mechanics of RPGs and the a critical story, a certain way of immersing the player in it which is contrasted to the style of WRPGs.

JRPGs tend towards a certain type of storyline but you could tell the plot from any novel and have the game be a JRPG with the right aesthetic approach.

Everything else besides the RPG game mechanics and the story are trappings. Those determine the subgenre.

Except he presents his opinions as facts to a definition that doesn't exist along with his preference in what mechanics of the game can only be allowed to qualify for said genre. Thus the accusations of trolling.

Have I presented this in a way that explains why BRP claims what he does? If not as facts, at least as a coherent train of thought.

LARPERS

Oh, wow, that's ... that's strange.

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

JRPGs come from Japan, WRPGs come from the west. Why is this so hard?

[Kuya]

Because Japan sucks and the West rules.

[BRP]

lol. I didn't even bother to define RPG is in this thread, because I didn't need to. All I need to say is what JRPGs and WRPGs are. Sure it is easier to understand me if you know what RPG means, but since "RPG elements" are strategy elements I'll just talk about things pertaining to the game's battle system. Don't know why I am only now being accused of this in this thread.

Except he presents his opinions as facts

Are you really this infantile?

[Cadsuane]

Blasphemy. The only good RPGs are Fallout 3 and Oblivion, clearly.

You know that number 3 after fallout denotes that there were 2 more before it.

BRP, I never understood your grading schema for games and it always seemed a bit arbitrary to me. What's your verdict for a game like Planescape: Torment that seems to defy your criteria for depth of gameplay but ends up being a cult classic for game-art snobs like me?

[Charismatic]

Oh hey, someone else who can't recognize a joke!

[Cephius]

lol for real, woooooosh

edit: i like your ninja edit where you're still wooshing. keep going!

[Kyo]

That one felt like a tornado.

[Lucavi]

Real talk going on in this thread. Proceed.

[Kyo]

Im sure they needed your permission.

[Cadsuane]

Uh, right back at you(se), I think? What am I missing?

Admission of preference for a particular JRPG like it's a guilty pleasure (haha) and then a caricature of WRPG fanboyism begetting the anti-JRPG argument... which is legitimate but lame as fuck and misses the entire point when you put shit like Oblivion on a pedestal. WRPGs have been categorically better than JRPGs at least since Baldur's Gate came out.

[Charismatic]

Jesus Christ, you're one dense motherfucker aren't you?
It was a JOKE. You do know how those work, right?

No one is placing anything on a pedestal you 'tard.

[Kyo]

I try to use smart words to make my otherwise incoherent statement readable. We thank you for this.

Cosigning the ^.

Jokes arent for the internet however.

[Kyo]

Real talking isnt for the intrawebs.