| FaRmLaNd said: @S.T.A.G.E. I'm well aware of the influence that early WRPG's had on JRPG's. Anyway, judging a storyline purely by its references to other works is a simplistic way of judging something. Whilst its definetely fulfilling to allude to past works, since both sub-genre have done so makes it an irrelivancy. Since WRPG's generally feature more interactivity in their narratives they are arguably utilising the medium more effectively but again a more linear plot allows for a more focussed narrative so you could argue that linear storytelling has its own advantages. At the end of the day most RPG's are crap and some are amazing. Both Sub-genre's have some truly masterful games in them so aruging whether insert genre is better is silly as it comes down to taste. |
JRPG's are beyond a sub genre of RPG's. It should be renamed the 'Japanese battle-system aventure'. Take UFC undisputed for example; it uses experience points and it isn't an RPG. You don't have to use experience points to be an RPG. RPG's have a concept which just aren't followed by JRPG's. JRPG's is an altnernate universe in terms of gaming. Yes, there are some great games...but they aren't traditional RPG's. You can say all you want that linear storytelling has its advantages, but that doesn't take away from the fact that JRPG's are still not RPG's. Unless you're playing a role....you're not role playing. One can watch JRPG movies of all the cut scenes of say...the FF series and figure out what the whole game is about. You can like the characters and think they are cool, but there is no way to be the character. You feel like you're watching the character, rather than making decisions. That is not an RPG.
