BioWare: JRPGs suffer from 'lack of evolution'

[Kenryoku_Maxis]

Words Of Wisdom said:

Kenryoku_Maxis said:

Words Of Wisdom said:

Kenryoku_Maxis said:

...not really.  The 'Golden Age' of PC RPGs WAS back in the 1980s and early 90s.  Sales were smaller back then because there were less gamers.  But PC was still dominant over consoles.  In comparison, games like Ultima and Wizardry did very well for their time.  And I don't know how you can say they 'didn't take off' considering they are considered the originators of video game RPGs (and did spawn a number of successful successors such as Dungeon Master.

But the late 90s, Consoles were overtaking PC.  And WRPGs were being overtaken by Console RPGs.  Its only been recently that WRPGs have made a comeback, and only with the help of joint releases on consoles.

The problem with this is that I was around and a PC gamer during those years.  I played a lot of the early PC games ranging from King's Quest series to games that no one has ever heard of like Tangle.  PC gaming as a whole really was subpar until around the time Commander Keen came out.  It was about then that a lot of good and memorable PC titles started being released (vga Trek, Tank Wars, etc).  Before then there wasn't really a golden age of anything except maybe MUDs.

In the late 90s, consoles weren't gaining ground against PCs.  Half-life and Starcraft had just been released, it was years until the PS2 would appear, and the most widely known of console RPGs, Final Fantasy 7 and Final Fantasy 8, were on the PC as well as the Playstation.  During that time Bioware was releasing Baldur's Gate and Black Isle was releasing Fallout.  It was one hell of a good time to be a PC gamer.

Look, if you're going to paraphrase wikipedia and think you understand what it was like to be a PC gamer during those years then go away because debating with you isn't worth my time.

I can claim similar thing towards you, who keeps bringing up games that aren't RPGs (what does Starcraft and Half-Life have to do with anything?).  Me bringing up LucasArts SCUMM games and early SIM games isn't going to prove my case for early RPGs on the PC.  In any event, I was playing both PC and console games in the 80s and 90s.  And its a proven fact that in the 80s or early 90s, not only were PC games more popular, but there were periods when entire genres (including RPGs) where only found on PC or only popular on PC.

A few games like Dragon Quest or Final Fantasy might be heralded as legendary today, but there was an entire ERA (span of over 15 years) where RPGs were dominant on the PC.  From Text based adventures to games like Ultima and Wizardry to games like The Bards Tale, Wasteland and etc.

Trust me, I fully admit good games came later.  That's what happens, games improve.  But the 'Golden Age' was not in 1998 and after for PC games or WRPGs.  If anything, PC games as a whole lost dominance in innovation and sales following the early 90s to consoles.  Even in recent years, all the best PC RPGs have had to make ports to consoles to cover their production costs or to compete with console RPGs.  INCLUDING Bioware games like Morrowind, Knights of the Old Republic and Mass Effect, which all sold better on consoles.

Starcraft and Half-life are plenty relevant if you're going to say in your post that consoles were overtaking the PC.  I thought you were making a general statement across the board but maybe I misread that though.

And being the only game in town doesn't mean they were dominant of anything.  It's like running a race by yourself.  You may be the winner but there's nothing really to win and if it takes you 2 hours to do the 100 meter dash then you're still awful despite being the winner.  That's why Final Fantasy and Dragon Warrior were so amazing.  They were simply better than everything that came before. 

In my opinion, the PC obviously had the edge before consoles had RPGs.  Once those arrived, they blew away pretty much all the PC RPGs through the NES and SNES eras.  The Playstation era is when Bioware/Black Isle were on the scene and pretty much destroyed console RPGs in terms of quality.  S-E putting their games on the PC only helped.  The PS2 was a turning point back in favor of consoles and Black Isle getting killed only cemented that.

Also, Morrowind is not a Bioware game.  I know that was a typo, but that's a really insulting typo to Bioware.  Also, KotOR and JE started the trend of Bioware RPGs on Microsoft systems because Microsoft oftered them $$$ and Vivendi had taken over by then.

You have to go back and look at the context of my whole paragraph.  Not just the initial part.  I was leading to a point.  That since Consoles overtook RPGs in the late 90s, it was only recently that better, more high quality WRPGs have come along to challenge the console RPGs (mostly from Japan).  But they also had to put their games on consoles to complete with the sales of console RPGs.

Your views of PC vs Console games quality is pretty much subjective however.  I'm talking purely of general opinion and sales of gamers.  In the NES and SNES eras, PC was still a dominant force and PC RPGs were still around.  But in the mid 1990s, they all but vanished and were overtaken by PSX, Saturn, Dreamcast and PS2 RPGs (along with limited offerings on N64 and GC).  In short, the mid 90s heralded the influx of imported RPGs from Japan with a loss of both quality and quantity of RPGs from the 'west'.  And its only been post 2000 that their reputation has come back...and mostly based on a handful of companies making a handful of games such as Blizzard, Bioware and Bethesta. 

Seriously, while there are great WRPGs out there, the subgenre itself has probably made as many games in ten years as Japan does in ONE.  Peoples view of its quality or not, this notion that WRPGs are ultimately superior and Japanese RPGs are instantly inferior is just getting old.  At best, its just a desperate ploy to get people to play more WRPGs and at worst, its an ignorant rant against a genre you don't know anything about because you refuse to play them claiming 'WRPGs are superior and all JRPGs are the same'.  All this view breeds is someone who likes JRPGs claiming 'well all WRPGs are the same so I'm never going to play one' and now you've acomplished nothing but creating an argument.

So in closing, I end my rant and say good job with another 'WRPG vs JRPG' thread.  It won't go anywhere.  And this comes from someone who likes both.