Scoobes said:
r505Matt said:
Scoobes said:
lestatdark said:
fighter said:
jrpgs didn't evolve towards a mature audience the way other genres did
in most jrpgs you're stuck with the same trivial scenarios and unidimensional caracters (evil guy is being evil cause , hey, he is evil, cute caracters that require protection when they don't need it, strong independent ones that won't protect until they're in love, etc.)
Bioware games on the other hand have the most depth to their scenarios and their references are more mature than before.
Mass Effect 2 for example is being influenced by Dune (checks and balances across the galaxy, racial issues), Ender's Game (utilitarism and alienation) and other brilliant SF novels. |
Actually, WRPG's haven't evolved into more mature audiences too, because it has always been it's focus since the Ultima days in the 80s.
If anything, WRPG's have been stagnated just as much as JRPGs in the same categories, in terms of story-telling. Gameplay wise, WRPGs have deviated much from it's original roots, that's true, but so have JRPGs as well.
The only difference is that JRPGs have been doing it longer. New gameplay mechanics have been implemented on JRPGs since the SNES days, so innovation is hard to come by on the genre today. For WRPGs is easier to innovate because it still has lots of untapped territory to explore, as WRPGs have only recently begun to expand.
|
Are you serious? Or have I read that wrong? Story-telling is the part of WRPGs that has advanced the most in recent years. The story's themselves tend to be somewhat generic but the way they tell them has embraced advances in technology and has decision-making that is incredibly impactful with serious consequences.
There is quite simply more variety and evolution in WRPGs, although I personally think this has to do with what classifies a JRPG. The requirements for a game to be a JRPG are much stricter than "It has to come from Japan". When someone does innovate it's sometimes not even classified as a JRPG anymore (e.g. Demon's Souls).
OT: I haven't completely given up on them, although I do play them a lot less than before. I just find that currently WRPGs are more worthy of my time as they tend to offer newer and more varied playstyles with story's that I find more engaging. The JRPGs I have played this gen just aren't engaging me as much as they did 5-10 yrs ago. The other problem is that I don't own a DS so I'm obviously missing out on a lot of JRPGs that I could potentially find enjoyable.
A little off topic but FFXIII has annoyed me slightly (my latest JRPG). It's tried to concentrate on story but the lack of towns means there is no respite from the constant grinding and battles... even though the battle system is probably one of the best in the series imo. The other problem is that whilst I don't mind linearity, it's so obviously linear (almost to the point of travelling in a straight line from A to B with not a lot in between) through masssive sections of the game with a major lack of side stories/quests and bonus areas other than to go back to constant grinding. Basically:
FFXIII= (Story + Grind)n
|
Well there is a difference between content and presentation. The content of stories in WRPGs and JRPGs have remained pretty much the same throughout, but presentation has changed a little in WRPGS. Even then, it's not much. Even though I LOVE Mass Effect, I'll be the first to say you don't have any real choice, just the illusion of choice. There haven't been any serious advances in that regard, just a small step. Hopefully, there will be progression, but it's been essentially the same for years now without any significant difference.
Unless I'm missing something? Was there a game that gave a real sense of consequences? Mass Effect 1/2 is negligible, some choices in the 1st barely affect the 2nd (this could change for 3 though). Fallout 3, very minor choices that have very regionally specific differences and don't affect the world as a whole. Morrowind/Oblivion, almost not even worth mentioning. You can kill anyone, but it can either ruin your game (killing a story NPC), ruin your ability to do some quests (quest NPC), or have no actual impact (other than getting seen/caught/arrested/fined etc.) I went on a guard-killing spree in Morrowind once; I think I killed more guards than there are actual NPCs in the city (it was the big city with the tribunal or something? I can't remember what it was called). Maybe I haven't played the game(s) you're thinking of, but I haven't seen anything that resembles real choice in WRPGs yet.
|
Illusion is sometimes just as important as actual choice and all the negligible changes do add up to a very different experience from player to player. Try Dragon Age where the choices can have a direct impact on the world around you even if the story of slaying the dragon remains the same. From the choices as to who becomes King near the end to all the little stories in each region can have varying impact such as which faction comes to support you in the battle and the skills they bring and others that you might not even realise until the end of the game.
As you've mentioned Mass Effect, go back and play ME2 and decide not to do all the character missions, or upgrade your ship and what's the outcome at the end? You hold the balance of life and death for nearly the entire crew. How is that not an important choice? I was shocked on my second playthrough when Mordin died (no one died on my first playthrough). I think your mixing up "choice" with "complete creative control of the story!".
Anyway, the point I've been trying to make is that where WRPGs seem to have developed in the 'telling' aspect, JRPGs have developed less still relying overly on cut-scenes. It's not just presentation, but actually finding ways to make the player care about the characters around him/her. I'm not saying JRPGs don't have this but WRPGs have found newer and a larger variety of ways of making a player care about the NPC around him/her. So, even with a poor story (like the generic one in ME2), WRPGs have recently done a better job of playing to the strengths of gaming as a storytelling medium.
|
I skipped over half your post since I didn't finish DA:O, or even ME2 yet. I do know about the differences on whether you upgrade your ship or not and whatnot. But if you want to talk about differences in endings, I point to Chrono Trigger, MUCH older, and sounds like the endings are more varied there too.
But I agree, illusion of choice has a powerful effect anyways. Just with that illusion, you are pulled into the game more, and the game can then carry more meaning. Even though I know I have very little control in the dialogue choices in ME2, I'm still completely immersed.
And of course, small changes make a difference in experience, but typically not in overall outcome. You still go from point A to point B. Now, maybe some cutscenes are a little different, but the end result is typically very close to the same. The kind of choice I want in a game is where at first, it looks like I'm going from point A to point B, but because of a choice I made, I'm going to point C instead. Like in the Star Fox games, where you go to different levels based on what you do, the next step is something like that in our RPGs.
Imagine, a choice you make ends up killing a pivotal party member, when it could be otherwise avoided, would completely change the game. Or because you're able to persuade an enemy commander to your side, suddenly new options are option to you. To some degree, these things are starting to happen, but it's almost too hard to do what I'm imagining. Maybe someday in some MMO something like this will be possible, I don't know, seems like a lot of work otherwise.
