WRPGs versus JRPGs, or: My mis-adventures in KOTOR

[zarx]

adriane23 said:

zarx said:

TES is not your typical WRPG tho, and the game is more about freedom and exploration than combat. It doesn't try to be a flashy action game like God of War. If you want that there is Kingdoms of Amalur, or you know a flashy action game. No one would hold up a TES game as an example of great combat. 

Not to mention "Your character basically just does some flimsy looking action at an enemy and numbers show up." could be used to describe most JRPG combat (just look at Xenoblade and The Last Story for example), tho I guess some have flashy animation and then numbers show up. Most modern western ARPGs don't even expose damage numbers anymore, Skyrim doesn't, Mass Effect and The Witcher 2 don't, Risen and Gothic never have etc. 

If you want a bit of combat depth (and no numbers poping up) in your WARPGs try the Witcher 2 or Mount & Blade etc. There is also a wealth of tactical/strategic and turnbassed WRPGs if those are your thing, give some of them a try.

And shouldn't this "but they generally have no aesthetic appeal." be "but they generally have no aesthetic appeal to me." asthetics are purely subjective. Personally I find games like The Witcher 2 to look pretty damn good. 

That's not an acceptable excuse. The games should at least have some kind of polish to the battle systems since you fight A LOT in the Elder Scrolls games. What if it was the opposite? What if TES had a great combat system, but the world was ugly, uninspired, and you could only walk?

You countered your own point about JRPG battle systems, but I will say that all JRPGs matched the description that you quoted me on before the fifth generation, but they progressivley improved since then.

Lastly, these are all obviously my opinions, so I won't be putting "imo" or "to me" in each one of my sentences.

Lastly lastly, I mentioned The Witcher 2 as one of the good WRPGs in one of my other posts in this thread.

A TES game with a world which was uninteresting to explore, but with good combat would be Dragon's Dogma wouldn't it? That is certainly how I have heard the game described, that or an action adventure game with an open world and AI buddies. I don't think games need to be all things too all people and there is more to gameplay than combat, many WRPGs often focus on things like player agency with choice in how story progresses and character development, exploration etc. That is not for everyone, but nothing ever is.

Really these days RPG genres are so broad it is impossible to really make blanket statements like that anyway. When games like Borderlands, The Witcher 2, Diablo 3, Skyrim, Mass Effect, XCOM: Enemy Unknown, World of Warcraft and Dragon Age can all be considered WRPGs and Dark Souls, Final Fantasy XIII, Valkyria Chronicles, Dragon's Dogma, Dragon Quest IX and Final Fantasy Tactics can all be considered JRPGs compairing them as genres in broad terms is pretty impossible.

I named 2 JRPGs from this generation which matched your description of most WRPGs. It is a rather shallow criticism anyway, mechanics are what really matter. I was trying to point out how silly a criticisim that was for a genre when compairing it to a genre that has lots of games that have the same "issue" rather than me saying that JRPGs have flimsy/flashy animations with numbers poping up is a bad thing. While also pointing out that most modern WRPGs don't actually match your description anyway. I like both JRPGs and WRPGs

You don't have to put "imo" at the end, you could word it like an oppinion tho. For example instead of "but they generally have no aesthetic appeal." you could write "I don't find most WRPGs to be aesthetically appealing" it's not hard.