The Elder Scrolls games are exactly like that, and it was the main WRPG series I was referring to. The gameplay is to basically strafe and swing your sword wildly around or shoot magic. There's no style to the gameplay at all. Pure hack n' slash games like God of War, Bayonetta, DMC, etc. add style to the mindless button mashing. That's not to say that WRPG's are mindless hack n' slash games, but they generally have no aesthetic appeal. Your character basically just does some flimsy looking action at an enemy and numbers show up. 

Uhh, FFXIII doesn't really have a world to navigate, unless you mean the connected corridors that sometimes branched off to enemies or items.

I'm referring to Oblivion, Skyrim, Dragon Age 2, Fable 2, Fable 3, Dungeon Siege 3, Diablo 3, Dishonored, Star Wars: The Old Republic. Maybe I'm not being clear, but I'm referring to the combat systems of WRPGs. They're usually clunky, with flimsy animations, and/or boring (Dragon Age: Origins).

clunky or boring for wrpg's?  compared to drop down menu's for JRPG's?  yeah, I'm going to have to agree to disagree here.  

*Quotes self* "Dragon's Dogma, Demon's Souls, Dark SOuls, and even FFXIII have great play mechanics,.... "

The JRPGs I was referring to in my previous post were not turn based JRPGs (You can make the argument for FFXIII, but you're really just pressing X and watching awesome moves happen). And I've fallen asleep on plenty of turn-based RPGs to know that they can be dull as nails, so we can actually agree to agree.

you know all those JRPG's you mention there are heavily influenced by WRPG design right?

Yep, but the combat mechanics were already being used in Japanese RPGs since the fifth generation. They were called Action RPGs then.

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. 

I agree. The main point of a JRPG is the STORY and Character development. And the main story, the characters and the world should really feel connected. Games like Final Fantasy X or Final Fantasy XIII shine with their story. There are not many games that offer that quality of storytelling. The last few final fantasy games made you think about blind belief and its risks, the consequences of atomic bombs or the effects of propaganda... The last FF offered really mature stories... and this "mature" does not mean massive depiction of violence, blood and gore. It means mature ethical topics.

Suikoden offered 108 different characters, but only some of them were really strong. The focus however lied also on the narrative. It was not the battle system that kept you going. It was the story.

A game, where the combat mechanics are the main point... thats a strategy RPG for me. Like Final Fantasy Tactics. There is a story, but the characters are there to give you more variety in combat. Final Fantasy Tactics has random characters that can fulfill different jobs and they are not important for the overall story.

The main problem in discussing RPGs online is that some people limit RPG to D&D. That is just one form of RPGs. A game like Oblivion felt not really like a true RPG for me. It was just a huge action-Adventure with some RPG-elements for me. It was a huge world, but I couldn't care about anything in the world. The main quest was disappointing and I never felt the world cared about the main quest. And the sidequests was just repetitive and I lost interest pretty soon.

Ultimately I feel that WRPG and JRPGs just can't be compared. They offer totally different experiences. And I personally feel that the WRPG dropped everything that I like about RPGS and concentrate on the bits that I do not like.

I like to play a RPG focusing on the story. I do not grind xp unless I have problems with the difficulty. I do not even try to maximize character stats. In the older FF's I used my mages only at the bosses because I didn't want to waste my mp on normal enemies that would go down after I short time anyway. Before the Boss fights I only used normal attacks with my mages to conserve mp... I do not care if I can complete my bestiary because I do not want to spent much time to see if there could be a rare enemy that I am still missing... I do not care about sidequests that much. Final Fantasy does it just right with a quest for the ultimate weapons and the ultimate magic/Summons.

The one thing that puts Rpgs over all other genres for me is that they are games that make you think about  certain issues. Most western games only try to deliver a cool character that is a kind of superhero and that can cope with every problem.

Try Planescape: Torment 

Sorry, no PC games... I used to play on PC while I was a kid and I really liked the LucasArts Adventures and some simulations. But I stopped playing with the pc when I got the PS1 and I will never buy a PC again. We only have a laptop for the internet and some word and excel stuff.