By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - Is Valkyria Chronicles a JRPG?

 

Is Valkyria Chronicles a JRPG?

Yes it is. 102 46.15%
 
No. It is not. 68 30.77%
 
Just let it go, d21. Just let it go. 50 22.62%
 
Total:220
scottie said:
Oh, btw I voted for give it up, but my that was mostly cos I like teasing d21lewis.

"Give it up" may have the least amount of votes, but that's what I'm leaning towards!  I'm more confused than ever!



Around the Network
CaptainPrice said:
Barozi said:

not really.
I always try to define the genre by its main features and in case of VC it's the strategic aspect.
I would just call it a strategy game, but SRPG is also okay. However JRPG misses the point.

If I had to choose one sub-genre to put it in it would be SRPG. But who said we have to pick one? Lots of games belong to multiple genres, e.g. Rainbow Six Vegas is a first-person shooter and a tactical shooter, Empire Total War is turn-based strategy and real-time tactics, Uncharted is arguably a third person shooter, action-adventure, and platformer. No one seems bothered about this except when it comes to JRPGs.

By the way, I do think the JRPG bit matters in describing VC. It has lots of the anime conventions of JRPGs including what I will politely describe as character design and wardrobe choices. It has characters talking about their feelings with their eyes closed. If someone bought it hoping for an RPG version of X-Com they'd soon be throwing up.

Oh I do care about other genres



Booh! said:
All JRPGs have more or less tactical elements, this is a legacy of the old turn based battle system. In the late '80s, tactical combats became quite common in RPGs, Pool of Radiance and its siblings are a good example: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/56/Pool_of_radiance_panels.png (upper right corner: a tactical combat). BTW the debate about JRPG/WRPG is a bit pointless imo.

Most games have tactical elements. In a shooter, how you move, use cover, act stealthily, camp, and more are all elements of tactics. In a game like Demon's Soul, how you set up your character (build choices are tactical choices) will deteremine how you play. If you set yourself up with high mobility and high attack power, it will change how you play tactically, and even how you view your enemies. You'll be more on guard, more mobile, and dodge more often, these are all tactical elements. Heck, even puzzle games, how you set up your combos, or use special moves (like Puzzle Quest). Every movement and choice you make in almost every game is tactical. Tactics are essentially conceptual actions used to achieve a goal.

The JRPG/WRPG discussion isn't pointless, it's important here since most gamers differ in their opinion of what defines JRPG and WRPG.



Kasz216 said:
Torillian said:
r505Matt said:
lestatdark said:
ps3_jrpg_gamer said:
Japanese doesn 't necessery means action or strategy but japanese
it is not a GENRE
JRPGS and WRPGS have nothing to do with genres like Action to Shooters

Classifying games based solely on the country of origin is a bit ridiculous. Why isn't there separation for other genres then? JPlatformers from WPlatformers? JAction-Adventure from WAction-Adventure?

There are inherent differences between a JRPG and a WRPG, differences from story-telling, character development, battle system, story setting, etc, etc. That's what makes them different SUBgenres

 

No one saw my previous post =( at the bottom of page 2, but I want to ask you this then:

What are the differences, in exact definitions, between JRPG and WRPG? Why do we have these sub-genres that aren't very clearly or easily understood by many, when we have other genres that are very intuitive. Why even have these counter-intuitive sub-genres?

Edit: I mean "exact definitions" as in you mention there are differences, but what are they?

Far as I can figure wRPG and jRPG are two distinctions that are separate from the disctinctions of battle system: Action RPG, Turn Based RPG, and Strategy RPG.

jRPGs are defined by a linear story with little to know choice within while wRPGs are all about choice and dialog decisions and making your own character.  Sometimes a game lik Demon's Souls will take one aspect from wRPG like the character creation, but overall I would still call it a jRPG because of the lack of dialog choices and the story only having a couple of meaningful decisions. 

Separating things by battle system is much simpler, but sadly that is not the norm.  By the way, if how close a game is to FF defines it as a jRPG why are games like Kingdom Hearts which have a completely different action based battle system put under the jRPG mantle.  Seems like someone would be just as dissapointed in a Kingdom Hearts as they would Valkyria Chronicles if they really wanted something like an FF.

JRPGs and WRPGs aren't defined by battle system.  SRPGS are though.  Therefore SRPG's aren't JRPGs just how if you took FF13 and changed all the gameplay to FPS gameplay, it would be a FPS not a JRPG.

but wRPG's have already changed out the gameplay for FPS gameplay and people seem to have no trouble at all calling games like Fallout 3, Borderlands, and Mass Effect 2 wRPG's.  Why are jRPG's any different?



...

Kasz216 said:
Torillian said:
r505Matt said:
lestatdark said:
ps3_jrpg_gamer said:
Japanese doesn 't necessery means action or strategy but japanese
it is not a GENRE
JRPGS and WRPGS have nothing to do with genres like Action to Shooters

Classifying games based solely on the country of origin is a bit ridiculous. Why isn't there separation for other genres then? JPlatformers from WPlatformers? JAction-Adventure from WAction-Adventure?

There are inherent differences between a JRPG and a WRPG, differences from story-telling, character development, battle system, story setting, etc, etc. That's what makes them different SUBgenres

 

No one saw my previous post =( at the bottom of page 2, but I want to ask you this then:

What are the differences, in exact definitions, between JRPG and WRPG? Why do we have these sub-genres that aren't very clearly or easily understood by many, when we have other genres that are very intuitive. Why even have these counter-intuitive sub-genres?

Edit: I mean "exact definitions" as in you mention there are differences, but what are they?

Far as I can figure wRPG and jRPG are two distinctions that are separate from the disctinctions of battle system: Action RPG, Turn Based RPG, and Strategy RPG.

jRPGs are defined by a linear story with little to know choice within while wRPGs are all about choice and dialog decisions and making your own character.  Sometimes a game lik Demon's Souls will take one aspect from wRPG like the character creation, but overall I would still call it a jRPG because of the lack of dialog choices and the story only having a couple of meaningful decisions. 

Separating things by battle system is much simpler, but sadly that is not the norm.  By the way, if how close a game is to FF defines it as a jRPG why are games like Kingdom Hearts which have a completely different action based battle system put under the jRPG mantle.  Seems like someone would be just as dissapointed in a Kingdom Hearts as they would Valkyria Chronicles if they really wanted something like an FF.

JRPGs and WRPGs aren't defined by battle system.  SRPGS are though.  Therefore SRPG's aren't JRPGs just how if you took FF13 and changed all the gameplay to FPS gameplay, it would be a FPS not a JRPG.

What? Are you telling me that if I take a JRPG, change its battle system to a turn based strategy gameplay, then I still have a JRPG because JRPG are not defined by the battle system? Good... that was my point!



Around the Network
Torillian said:
Kasz216 said:
Torillian said:
r505Matt said:
lestatdark said:
ps3_jrpg_gamer said:
Japanese doesn 't necessery means action or strategy but japanese
it is not a GENRE
JRPGS and WRPGS have nothing to do with genres like Action to Shooters

Classifying games based solely on the country of origin is a bit ridiculous. Why isn't there separation for other genres then? JPlatformers from WPlatformers? JAction-Adventure from WAction-Adventure?

There are inherent differences between a JRPG and a WRPG, differences from story-telling, character development, battle system, story setting, etc, etc. That's what makes them different SUBgenres

 

No one saw my previous post =( at the bottom of page 2, but I want to ask you this then:

What are the differences, in exact definitions, between JRPG and WRPG? Why do we have these sub-genres that aren't very clearly or easily understood by many, when we have other genres that are very intuitive. Why even have these counter-intuitive sub-genres?

Edit: I mean "exact definitions" as in you mention there are differences, but what are they?

Far as I can figure wRPG and jRPG are two distinctions that are separate from the disctinctions of battle system: Action RPG, Turn Based RPG, and Strategy RPG.

jRPGs are defined by a linear story with little to know choice within while wRPGs are all about choice and dialog decisions and making your own character.  Sometimes a game lik Demon's Souls will take one aspect from wRPG like the character creation, but overall I would still call it a jRPG because of the lack of dialog choices and the story only having a couple of meaningful decisions. 

Separating things by battle system is much simpler, but sadly that is not the norm.  By the way, if how close a game is to FF defines it as a jRPG why are games like Kingdom Hearts which have a completely different action based battle system put under the jRPG mantle.  Seems like someone would be just as dissapointed in a Kingdom Hearts as they would Valkyria Chronicles if they really wanted something like an FF.

JRPGs and WRPGs aren't defined by battle system.  SRPGS are though.  Therefore SRPG's aren't JRPGs just how if you took FF13 and changed all the gameplay to FPS gameplay, it would be a FPS not a JRPG.

but wRPG's have already changed out the gameplay for FPS gameplay and people seem to have no trouble at all calling games like Fallout 3, Borderlands, and Mass Effect 2 wRPG's.  Why are jRPG's any different?

Here's my point perfectly, even people who agree that JRPG and WRPG are not geographical markings disagree as to what is JRPG and WRPG. Why don't we just throw these pointless, inefficient classifications away?



JRPGS doen 't necessery mean a FF or a DQ OR ANY OTHER COPY it means japanese-role-playing-game this is a wrong that it was created when the gamers wanted to diverse western-rpgs from japenese-rpgs but with the stereotype FF tradition had an end when developers wanted to focus on blending and trying other thing ,no that old-style jrpgs (SEE DEMON 'S SOUL) Valkyria chronicles is like a strategy game,rpg game,shooter game and sometimes even simulation with explosive tactics but still IT IS A JRPG



VALKYRIA CHRONICLES

IS  A  JRPG

BELIEVE OR NOT



ps3_jrpg_gamer said:

VALKYRIA CHRONICLES

IS  A  JRPG

BELIEVE OR NOT

Your use of really bold print and striking red lettering has convinced me!



After posting a bunch on this topic, it hit me like a brick.

JRPG = I want to play on a console (when I played FF8 on the PC it did NOT feel right, Grandia 2 on the PC, etc) JRPG = console RPG.

WRPG= I want to play them on the PC. Fallout3, Dragon Age: Origins, Oblivion, Mass Effect 1/2, KOTOR 1/2 all felt better to me on the PC than they ever did on their respective consoles (I played all of the above on the PC + Oblivion, Fallout 3 on the PS3, KOTOR 1/2 on Xbox, Mass Effect 1/2 on 360). WRPG = Computer RPG.

I cannot think of any of these games that do not fall under this exact classification (to me atleast).