| Mnementh said: It's funny, that I think JRPGs are not feel like real RPGs. I have a hard time to classify them as that. That's why I didn't mention Pandoras Tower here: It's a great game, but I don't think it's a RPG. First, let be a bit more specific, what I mean with JRPG. I think it's not very clear. Most people don't classify Etrian Odyssey (that I mentioned) as JRPG, it plays like a great oldschool WRPG. Also Pokemon, Monster Hunter or Fire Emblem are seldom classified as JRPG. The defining thing for JRPG is in my opinion a RPG that is more defined by it's story than by developing the character or exploring. That makes sense, companies like Square, Enix (both separated at that time) and Nihon Falom created mainly Visual Novels back in the eighties. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_novel That is basically a game, that has a story, but only very few interactivity. The player has sometimes multiple-choice-selection, but mostly he can only accept a chunk of text to get the next. Now, why I think they are not 'real' RPGs? Computer/video-game RPGs all descend from Pen&Paper RPGs. Some computer-games had licenses from D&D or other popular RPG-franchises. You sit around a table with your friends, one of them is the game master (this role is taken by computer and game in computer-rpg). Every player controls a character, while the GM (game-master) controls monsters, NPCs and the world. But as a player I have total control over my character. I can decide everything for him. The job of the GM is to keep the story coherent, but the story is obviously strongly influenced by the decision of the player-characters. The GM adapt to this and a together the players create a story, the GM don't had in mind this way. On computer that obviously don't work to that degree. You have to make concessions. But the strong story-driven JRPGs abandon much more of control over the character. Can you decide which other character your character falls in love with? Can you choose the side on which you're fighting? These choices are made for you from the game. That's funny, because the genre is called Role Playing Game. But you can't really play that role, that part is taken by the game. JRPGs for me often feel like a train - you can switch wagons, but you always stay on the rails. JRPGs are more like action-adventures (Zelda) - and there is nothing wrong with it, I like adventures. I only had to say it, because you obviously feel different about it, you said that WRPGs are not real RPGs for you. Try playing Pen&Paper once, they defined the genre. Probably you would also feel, that they are not real RPGs. |
Well, I must admit that I am not experienced with Dungeons&Dragons or Pen&Paper games. In Europe, or specially here in Austria, they never really took off. The most similar experience I had might be a board game called "Hero Quest".
My first contact with something called "Roleplay" was at school. We read some Drama in german class from Schiller and Goethe, where everyone had to read the lines of a character. After we finished reading (we were not Acting, just reading)) we interpreted the play and talked about its meaning, the intentions of the author, the motivations of each character, etc. So in that play I read the Role of Iphigenie (for example) and I was not supposed to read what I personally would like the story to be. I had to read the given text. So no freedom in roleplays. I had to experience the story through the eyes of a character, but in the greater context, roleplays meant analyzing and interpreting to me.
So JRPGs are more like a theatre play to me... not a computerized version of a game that I almost heard nothing about. Maybe that is simply a cultural thing. But there is a reason why Continental Europe and Japan are less enthusiastic about WRPGs. One reason may be that D&D or P&P are less common here. According to Wikipedia, since 2008 there hasn't been a D&D Publisher for Germany.
I share your opinion about JRPGs and I also do not count Pokemon etc. as a JRPG (As I stated, a JRPG is more defined by its story approach than by its battle system). A JRPG just follow a different story approach. You play a story and are supposed to think about what is going on. Not only the "Lore of the World", the background story. You are confronted with the main story and the intentions and motivations of the characters. Some JRPGs are so complex that you have troubles to fully understand what is going on. After I finished FF7 for the first time I realy liked the game, but I had troubles understanding some scenes. After my second playthrough I found the secret scene in the Shinra Village and finally I could really understand what was going on. It was alway there... I just couldn't figure it out 100% why cloud was acting strangely during the game.
"Every player controls I character"... That is the point. In a JRPG, in my opinion, you do not "control" 1 Character. You control a party. And you should also think about your characters. Every character is a placeholder for a different point of view. In a WRPG, you play as character A (Warrior), than start again as character B ( Mage) and restart as a new character. You place your wanted personality in this character and want to have freedom of choice. In my opinion, this is a "self-centric approach". Your character is simply "You in the game". A JRPG follows a more holistic approach. You are not supposed to "be Cloud in FF7". You can like or dislike the character, but he is not controlled by you... he follows his own intentions.
The latestest Final Fantasies even got rid of the "main character and his support character" approach. Now you have a party of more or less equal importance. Cloud or Squall were the most important characters of the Party and their struggle with their opponents Sephiroth and Cifer were in the main focus. But since FF IX Square started to follow a different approach. Zidane and the Princess Garnet were very important, but Vivis story ark was of equal importance.
Final Fantasy XII or Final Fantasy XIII do not really have a "main character" which seems to put off many people on the forums. Thats because you are supposed to care about every character. Lightning may be the most advertised character in FF XIII, but the key to understanding the story lies in Vanille.
Ok, enough of that. So, my main problem with Oblivion was, that it was simplay lacking this holistic approach. Ok, there are no other characters. Fine. But the character is also a silent character, so there is no interpretation of the character motivations. I even do not know why i was in jail in the beginning. OK, that leaves the main quest. But the main quest is shallow. I was even somehow missing a connection between the main quest and the world. The world is in grave danger, i am supposed to save the world (and don not even know "Why me") and when i visit a City now one seems to care about the Danger. That was the breach that killed the game for me because the World doesn't seem plausible for me. I am to save the World, but I invest my time in becoming the leader of every guild (very important. That is like the world is going to end tomorrow and i spent my last time at the Casino to win a fortune which I would not be able to enjoy very long.). All in all, the WRPG simply feels lacking to me. When I hear RPG of the year, I want to enjoy a good and emotional story. And it is that simple for me. Non-linearity kills the joy for me because it seems almost impossible to write a thrilling story when your progress in the game is not defined. The thrill of a scene has to be built slowly. If you cannot ensure, that scenes A, B and C are seen before scene D, how can you make scene plausible and strong?
I hope I could make myself understood. English is a foreign language to me and this is not a simple topic.
