By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Torillian on 22 June 2012
Edit Thread
happydolphin said:
Torillian said:

Quality is a reasonable argument when someone calls the Wii the saving grace of J-gaming.  

But ok, I'll just stick with the initial point then, you don't have numbers to work off of because his JRPG list is filled with things that have absolutely no defining RPG mechanics and is useless for a JRPG discussion.  Impressive as the work he put into is, it's all moot if it isn't accurate.

Okay, but did you check to see if he used the same metric in the PS3 list?

It doesn't matter what you prefer bottom line, what matters is that his list is meaningful. And if he considers Zelda an RPG (some do), so long as he's being consistent it's okay.

Sure, for the strict topic of j-rpg I'd agree with you he should just include games that are true RPGs. But when it comes to the validity of his list, if he considers a game or another an RPG when there is a level of grey-zone (Zelda is renouned for it), as long as he's consistent it's not fair to just brush it off.

So, did you see any similar games (like Zelda and Harvest Moon) in the PS3 list?

I ran through both lists, the PS3 list is missing three like he mentioned, has three games that aren't really going to come out any time soon if ever (FFX HD, FFV13, Persona 5) as well as several non-RPGs but not nearly the number as the Wii.   

So you want the list to be meaningful?  I don't see how it can be, being consistantly wrong in how you make a list of games for a specific genre means that it's useless because unless both systems have the same number of games that look like but aren't RPGs then the mistakes don't cancel each other out.  A list of all 3rd party titles developed in Japan would be meaningful because his genre definitions wouldn't come into play, but that's not the case here.



...