By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - JRPG's are dead

SaviorX on 13 June 2010

There is nothing wrong with turn-based battle. People get mad that you just mash X, but in games like Legend of Dragoon, you were actually pretty active in what was going on in battle, and had to pay attention. The only flaws that game had was poor music production, and a weird ending. Otherwise, it is very good. I always wondered why there was no sequel, but after hearing from SE that towns take 43 years to make, I understand now...

 

I'll just say that don't confuse FF13 becoming lame with the entire JRPG genre failing. Just because Square Enix is making poor games, doesn't mean everyone else is. SE used to be the king of em', so their decline does tarnish the genre  as a whole, but they are not dead. Excellent Square is dead; that I can agree on.

Cutscenes ruined JRPGs once FMVx exceeded two minutes in length. Early Ps1 JRPGs had them, but they never lasted too long. I don't think FF7 or Legend of Dragoon ever had one that exceeded 4 minutes (LOD especially). SE started creaming themselves with the idea of CGI and almost killed themselves with it by making the FF:The Spirits Within movie that no one watched. Even after it almost destroyed them, they are still 'movie' happy and the quality of their games was dashed as a result. As of now, they are just an embarrassment.



Leatherhat on July 6th, 2012 3pm. Vita sales:"3 mil for COD 2 mil for AC. Maybe more. "  thehusbo on July 6th, 2012 5pm. Vita sales:"5 mil for COD 2.2 mil for AC."

Around the Network
alekth on 13 June 2010
lestatdark said:

alekth said:

...

The only thing that I really disliked about the game was the turtles postgame grinding. Depending on luck it's not necessarily the worst grinding the genre has seen but following a game with close to none perceived grinding it did feel pretty bad.

Only if you resorted to using the Death spamming technique. I grind the Adamantoises by defeating normally. At 1:30 - 2:00 minutes per battle, it was faster than just waiting for Death to stick and refilling the TP all the way back to 5, after spending it on summons. 

And you can only use that technique on Adamantoises. Death doesn't work on their upgraded version, the Long Guis.

Nah, I used Death maybe 2-3 times for them. Talking about the luck og getting the necessary platinum ingots and traps. I think I was getting them pretty often (above the purely statistical odds, but it was still pretty annoying).

And I actually mainly used Death to get my last two traps from the Long Guis (just not the way it was supposed to be used - I used the method of stacking up all matk gear on Vanille, casting death and then switching to com/com/com to get the damage bonus).



lestatdark on 13 June 2010
alekth said:
lestatdark said:

alekth said:

...

The only thing that I really disliked about the game was the turtles postgame grinding. Depending on luck it's not necessarily the worst grinding the genre has seen but following a game with close to none perceived grinding it did feel pretty bad.

Only if you resorted to using the Death spamming technique. I grind the Adamantoises by defeating normally. At 1:30 - 2:00 minutes per battle, it was faster than just waiting for Death to stick and refilling the TP all the way back to 5, after spending it on summons. 

And you can only use that technique on Adamantoises. Death doesn't work on their upgraded version, the Long Guis.

Nah, I used Death maybe 2-3 times for them. Talking about the luck og getting the necessary platinum ingots and traps. I think I was getting them pretty often (above the purely statistical odds, but it was still pretty annoying).

And I actually mainly used Death to get my last two traps from the Long Guis (just not the way it was supposed to be used - I used the method of stacking up all matk gear on Vanille, casting death and then switching to com/com/com to get the damage bonus).

Well, in drop terms, FFXII was more sheer luck based than FFXIII. Especially when you were trying to get Danjuro's or Yaggryu's, which only had a 1% chance drop after chaining more than 100 of certain enemies that themselves had a lower than 10% ratio of appearance

I've seen far worse RPG's in terms of item and gear grinding than FFXIII. 



Current PC Build

CPU - i7 8700K 3.7 GHz (4.7 GHz turbo) 6 cores OC'd to 5.2 GHz with Watercooling (Hydro Series H110i) | MB - Gigabyte Z370 HD3P ATX | Gigabyte GTX 1080ti Gaming OC BLACK 11G (1657 MHz Boost Core / 11010 MHz Memory) | RAM - Corsair DIMM 32GB DDR4, 2400 MHz | PSU - Corsair CX650M (80+ Bronze) 650W | Audio - Asus Essence STX II 7.1 | Monitor - Samsung U28E590D 4K UHD, Freesync, 1 ms, 60 Hz, 28"

Christian973 on 13 June 2010
SaviorX said:

There is nothing wrong with turn-based battle. People get mad that you just mash X, but in games like Legend of Dragoon, you were actually pretty active in what was going on in battle, and had to pay attention. The only flaws that game had was poor music production, and a weird ending. Otherwise, it is very good. I always wondered why there was no sequel, but after hearing from SE that towns take 43 years to make, I understand now...

 

I'll just say that don't confuse FF13 becoming lame with the entire JRPG genre failing. Just because Square Enix is making poor games, doesn't mean everyone else is. SE used to be the king of em', so their decline does tarnish the genre  as a whole, but they are not dead. Excellent Square is dead; that I can agree on.

Cutscenes ruined JRPGs once FMVx exceeded two minutes in length. Early Ps1 JRPGs had them, but they never lasted too long. I don't think FF7 or Legend of Dragoon ever had one that exceeded 4 minutes (LOD especially). SE started creaming themselves with the idea of CGI and almost killed themselves with it by making the FF:The Spirits Within movie that no one watched. Even after it almost destroyed them, they are still 'movie' happy and the quality of their games was dashed as a result. As of now, they are just an embarrassment.


I couldn't agree more with this statement.



3DS Friend Code:   4596-9822-6909

MaxwellGT2000 on 13 June 2010
Khuutra said:

Courtesy of Smeags:


Oh man that is old but I love it so, it makes me crack up every time! I wonder why Smeags stopped and why I'm not in one of the comics XD



MaxwellGT2000 - "Does the amount of times you beat it count towards how hardcore you are?"

Wii Friend Code - 5882 9717 7391 0918 (PM me if you add me), PSN - MaxwellGT2000, XBL - BlkKniteCecil, MaxwellGT2000

Around the Network
dtewi on 13 June 2010
MaxwellGT2000 said:
Khuutra said:

Courtesy of Smeags:


Oh man that is old but I love it so, it makes me crack up every time! I wonder why Smeags stopped and why I'm not in one of the comics XD

Smeags did comics of members?



Kimi wa ne tashika ni ano toki watashi no soba ni ita

Itsudatte itsudatte itsudatte

Sugu yoko de waratteita

Nakushitemo torimodosu kimi wo

I will never leave you

greenmedic88 on 13 June 2010
richardhutnik said:
dtewi said:
richardhutnik said:

Well, to me, it then sounds like what allies were in normal JRPGs aren't really allies.  What they normally are, is merely extensions of your game equipment that you manipulate on a battlefield.

Erm... yeah?

And?

And, to me, the moving away from direct control sounds like making an RPG be more like an RPG.  Back in the day, you controlled your allies, because the AI was as dumb as dirt.  Now, AI work is supposed to advance, so allies should be able to function independently of you.  You play a character in the game, with allies, rather than play a party of characters.  This should, when done right, make it feel more like actual role playing, instead of a computer simulation of a role playing game.

Take, for example, a game like Left 4 Dead, but where you could improve your stats.  That would end up being more like a real roleplaying experience than what you would have with older stuff that goes under "RPGs".  The central definition of role playing is playing a role.  It is NOT commanding a party.  People don't role play parties, they role play characters.

Traditionally, yes. A role player only plays one character going back to pencil and paper RPG roots, but video game players have become accustomed to assigning actions to all party members (due to rock stupid AI as you mentioned) rather than have them act independently.

The typical party member command based system that's been used in JRPGs since the beginning makes them more like turn based combat strategy games, but regardless, when you change certain parts of an old formula (what players expect before playing the game), for some you end up with New Coke.

I prefer it personally because it speeds things up and I can more or less count on the AI to not screw things up, but obviously a lot of people don't.

Personally, I think it would have been an interesting experiment to see an MORPG that enabled up to three (or whatever max party size) players to independently control one of the six characters during combat, but due to the extreme linear nature of FFXIII, I don't think it would hold well in comparison to a full MMORPG.



demonfox13 on 13 June 2010
lestatdark said:

JRPG's aren't dead. And your datalog excuse is far from being fair. Mass Effect tells a ton of story through the logs themselves. Why suddenly that's a different standard for JRPG's?

I do agree though, that FFXIII relied way too much on cutscenes, but that's an inherent fault to FF itself, especially the post-SNES FF's and the appearance of FMV's.

But as a genre itself, JRPG's are far from dead. DS  JRPG catalog alone can pretty much put to shame every home console WRPG and JRPG combined (except maybe Demon's Souls and Lost Odyssey).


I honestly can't fully agree with DS vs the home console ones simply because I had an amazing time with Folklore, Demons' Souls, Resonance of Fate, WKC and Valkyria Chronicles as far as current gen goes. Kingdom Hearts on DS was fun but I did force myself to finish it. Fire Emblem was ok. Surprisingly I had a good time with Valkyrie Profile: Covenant of the Plume though. I can't stand the pokemon series as I am no long 9 or 10 years old (actually even my 10 yr old nephew can't stand pokemon either). ME series (although not my cup of tea) puts just about every DS rpg to shame, as well as Fallout3.

Now if you want to bring out DS vs other generations (remember you didn't specify DS vs what gen), Valkyrie Profile 1 and 2 alone blow the entire DS rpg catalog out the water (unless you hate the fast paced wonderful battle system), but then I can go further into xenogears, or legend of legaia, or grandia 2, hell even BoF: Dragon Quarter.

I also don't see a fault of including some FMV's and stuff in the FF series as long as it's not overdone. I did enjoy them in FFVII, and I enjoyed them also on FFVIII (one of the sickest intro's to date), they both had solid gameplay to back it up, and that cool amazing stuff that people wanted to do was done via limit breaks (Zell's stuff was memorable, and I still think that Squall's Lionheart > Omnislash).

DS has a fairly solid library of rpgs, and it's true that this gen has been fairly lackluster vs previous gens, but there are several rpgs that surpass anything the DS has to offer.



Make games, not war (that goes for ridiculous fanboys)

I may be the next Maelstorm or not, you be the judge http://videogamesgrow.blogspot.com/  hopefully I can be more of an asset than a fanboy to VGC hehe.

lestatdark on 13 June 2010
demonfox13 said:
lestatdark said:

JRPG's aren't dead. And your datalog excuse is far from being fair. Mass Effect tells a ton of story through the logs themselves. Why suddenly that's a different standard for JRPG's?

I do agree though, that FFXIII relied way too much on cutscenes, but that's an inherent fault to FF itself, especially the post-SNES FF's and the appearance of FMV's.

But as a genre itself, JRPG's are far from dead. DS  JRPG catalog alone can pretty much put to shame every home console WRPG and JRPG combined (except maybe Demon's Souls and Lost Odyssey).


I honestly can't fully agree with DS vs the home console ones simply because I had an amazing time with Folklore, Demons' Souls, Resonance of Fate, WKC and Valkyria Chronicles as far as current gen goes. Kingdom Hearts on DS was fun but I did force myself to finish it. Fire Emblem was ok. Surprisingly I had a good time with Valkyrie Profile: Covenant of the Plume though. I can't stand the pokemon series as I am no long 9 or 10 years old (actually even my 10 yr old nephew can't stand pokemon either). ME series (although not my cup of tea) puts just about every DS rpg to shame, as well as Fallout3.

Now if you want to bring out DS vs other generations (remember you didn't specify DS vs what gen), Valkyrie Profile 1 and 2 alone blow the entire DS rpg catalog out the water (unless you hate the fast paced wonderful battle system), but then I can go further into xenogears, or legend of legaia, or grandia 2, hell even BoF: Dragon Quarter.

I also don't see a fault of including some FMV's and stuff in the FF series as long as it's not overdone. I did enjoy them in FFVII, and I enjoyed them also on FFVIII (one of the sickest intro's to date), they both had solid gameplay to back it up, and that cool amazing stuff that people wanted to do was done via limit breaks (Zell's stuff was memorable, and I still think that Squall's Lionheart > Omnislash).

DS has a fairly solid library of rpgs, and it's true that this gen has been fairly lackluster vs previous gens, but there are several rpgs that surpass anything the DS has to offer.

When I said that the DS catalog can put to shame home consoles catalog and then insert Demon's Souls and Lost Odyssey, one would realize that I was implying this gen alone

I'm not going to go into the older gen argument, since my favorite games of all time are from past gens. I don't have a reason to argue against you there. 

As for this gen, I'll have to say that there are quite a grand number of RPG's on the DS that have a very high amount of quality. Both Mario&Luigi games, Devil Survivor, Dragon Quest IV and Dragon Quest V, SMT: Devil Survivor, Rune Factory, all of the Castlevania games, all of the Pokemon games, Chrono Trigger, Final Fantasy III and Final Fantasy IV, Final Fantasy XII Revenant Wings, Valkyrie Profile: Covenant of the Plume, The World Ends With You, Suikoden Trieskis, Phantasy Star Zero, the Megaman Starforce games, Lunar Knights, Kingdom Hearts 358/2 days. 

And there's probably a lot more than that. Since I only got my DS a couple of months ago, I'm still far behind the DS RPG catalog. I'm pretty sure someone like Kenryoku_Maxis can list you a couple of more good DS RPG games. 

This is what I meant as the DS catalog putting to shame the home JRPG and WRPG catalog. Probably home consoles have a few higher rated games than DS, but in the overall panorama, it just can't compete with the DS. 

And the punchline: I didn't bring up the DS catalog to discuss handhelds vs home consoles. I just find it extremely appalling when someone says that JRPGs are dead, or that this gen has had fewer quality JRPGs than previous gens, when you have quite a good amount of quality JRPGs on handhelds. I can list you a couple more good ones on PSP as well. 



Current PC Build

CPU - i7 8700K 3.7 GHz (4.7 GHz turbo) 6 cores OC'd to 5.2 GHz with Watercooling (Hydro Series H110i) | MB - Gigabyte Z370 HD3P ATX | Gigabyte GTX 1080ti Gaming OC BLACK 11G (1657 MHz Boost Core / 11010 MHz Memory) | RAM - Corsair DIMM 32GB DDR4, 2400 MHz | PSU - Corsair CX650M (80+ Bronze) 650W | Audio - Asus Essence STX II 7.1 | Monitor - Samsung U28E590D 4K UHD, Freesync, 1 ms, 60 Hz, 28"

dahuman on 13 June 2010
greenmedic88 said:
richardhutnik said:
dtewi said:
richardhutnik said:

Well, to me, it then sounds like what allies were in normal JRPGs aren't really allies.  What they normally are, is merely extensions of your game equipment that you manipulate on a battlefield.

Erm... yeah?

And?

And, to me, the moving away from direct control sounds like making an RPG be more like an RPG.  Back in the day, you controlled your allies, because the AI was as dumb as dirt.  Now, AI work is supposed to advance, so allies should be able to function independently of you.  You play a character in the game, with allies, rather than play a party of characters.  This should, when done right, make it feel more like actual role playing, instead of a computer simulation of a role playing game.

Take, for example, a game like Left 4 Dead, but where you could improve your stats.  That would end up being more like a real roleplaying experience than what you would have with older stuff that goes under "RPGs".  The central definition of role playing is playing a role.  It is NOT commanding a party.  People don't role play parties, they role play characters.

Traditionally, yes. A role player only plays one character going back to pencil and paper RPG roots, but video game players have become accustomed to assigning actions to all party members (due to rock stupid AI as you mentioned) rather than have them act independently.

The typical party member command based system that's been used in JRPGs since the beginning makes them more like turn based combat strategy games, but regardless, when you change certain parts of an old formula (what players expect before playing the game), for some you end up with New Coke.

I prefer it personally because it speeds things up and I can more or less count on the AI to not screw things up, but obviously a lot of people don't.

Personally, I think it would have been an interesting experiment to see an MORPG that enabled up to three (or whatever max party size) players to independently control one of the six characters during combat, but due to the extreme linear nature of FFXIII, I don't think it would hold well in comparison to a full MMORPG.

unfortunately, the AI in FF13 is quiet dumb when it comes to buffs or debuffs, though such problems can be solved by having 2 syns or 2 sabs, it's very poor when it's only 1 in the para, the samething can be said about healing, they can be really stupid even with 2 healers so I often have to make myself at least a healer and waste one damage or debuff slot, which is annoying.