Scoobes said:
darkknightkryta said:
gergroy said:
Well, you would know what we are talking about if you had played the game. Fable 2 at the time (remember, it came out like 5 years ago) wasn't a bad game. However, the comments were about his comparison to xenoblade, a very recent game. Comparing a recent game to an older, less well recieved game that is an outlier of the WRPG genre isn't a very good comparison.
As far as the RPG elements, lionhead removed a lot of them for fable 2 and almost completely removed them in fable 3. I would classify the first fable as an action RPG, but fable 2 and 3 I would probably call action/adventure games.
|
Yes I would know better :P. All I remember is that Sessler and Webb gave Fable 2 game of the year because of its RPG elements, talking to people, being a polygamist, etc. Though a game as highly acclaimed as Fable 2 should be able to stand the tests of time regardless so I think it is fair to compare to Xenoblade, one of the best WRPG this gen vs one of the best JRPG this gen.
|
By the same token, Zelda could be considered a JRPG (and a great one at that).
If you want to compare the best WRPGs and JRPGs of this console gen then there are plenty of other games that could be put forward ahead of Fable 2 and are fairly true to the WRPG genre (e.g. Witcher 2, Skyrim, Dragon Age Origins).
|
Deus Ex: HR!
But I find this whole thread really screwy. People are cherry picking JRPG's and comparing them to negatively cherry picked WRPG's to make a point and Vice Versa.
There are mechanically screwy JRPG's and WRPG's and there are mechanically sound JRPG's and WRPG's. There's some JRPG's and WRPG's with good characters dialogue and story, and some with poor. And everything in between. They are designed from different perspectives Japananese vs Western and have tendencies, but each side overlaps with eachother at times. Atleast imo.
