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

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

gergroy said:
darkknightkryta said:
Why is everyone saying Fable 2 is subpar when it's been game of the year by multiple publications? More ironic is that it's been claimed game of the year because of its RPG elements. Note I haven't played through much of any Fable, I thought the combat in the first was horrid so I haven't bothered with the series and am just going by the media and what my friends have told me about the game.

Well, you would know what we are talking about if you had played the game.  Fable 2 at the time (remember, it came out like 5 years ago) wasn't a bad game.  However, the comments were about his comparison to xenoblade, a very recent game.  Comparing a recent game to an older, less well recieved game that is an outlier of the WRPG genre isn't a very good comparison.  

As far as the RPG elements, lionhead removed a lot of them for fable 2 and almost completely removed them in fable 3.  I would classify the first fable as an action RPG, but fable 2 and 3 I would probably call action/adventure games.  

Actually, the games are 2 years apart... That's not comparing a recent game to an old game...



I'm on Twitter @DanneSandin!

Furthermore, I think VGChartz should add a "Like"-button.

Around the Network
WiiBox3 said:
I also tried playing KOTOR a few years ago and couldn't get into it. The mechanics didn't hold up and I had just played Mass Effect, so I put it aside.

A couple of recent games which would be a better intro into (3rd person) WRPGs would be The Witcher 2 (I have never played the first one and I never felt like I needed too since the game gives you all you need to know.) Also Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning, I'm 90+ hours into this game. It has a great combat system, looks gorgeous, and makes it easy on you when you level up. (Plus if you don't like what you chose while leveling up you can respec almost anytime you want)

Dragon Age Origins is fun, but I wouldn't recommend it to someone who is new to WRPGs, you need to spend a lot of time setting up systems. Also Mass Effect 3 is pretty streamlined if you want an WRPG that is polished to the point of a JRPG.

My laptop is crap for gaming. 6th gen games are about all it can handle.



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

zarx said:
adriane23 said:

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. 

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.



I am the Playstation Avenger.

   

Mr Khan said:
WiiBox3 said:
I also tried playing KOTOR a few years ago and couldn't get into it. The mechanics didn't hold up and I had just played Mass Effect, so I put it aside.

A couple of recent games which would be a better intro into (3rd person) WRPGs would be The Witcher 2 (I have never played the first one and I never felt like I needed too since the game gives you all you need to know.) Also Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning, I'm 90+ hours into this game. It has a great combat system, looks gorgeous, and makes it easy on you when you level up. (Plus if you don't like what you chose while leveling up you can respec almost anytime you want)

Dragon Age Origins is fun, but I wouldn't recommend it to someone who is new to WRPGs, you need to spend a lot of time setting up systems. Also Mass Effect 3 is pretty streamlined if you want an WRPG that is polished to the point of a JRPG.

My laptop is crap for gaming. 6th gen games are about all it can handle.

My bad. I forgot that the Wii was your console. If you are planning on getting a Wii U, then you can try Mass Effect 3, which would be the easiest WRPG to play since most of the stat choices are streamlined. (You only choose powers) Though the action based combat is very good and its a very fun ride. Plus the ending shouldn't upset you since you haven't been playing the games over 7 years. (It's still a better ending than most games, IMHO)



WiiBox3 said:
Mr Khan said:
WiiBox3 said:
I also tried playing KOTOR a few years ago and couldn't get into it. The mechanics didn't hold up and I had just played Mass Effect, so I put it aside.

A couple of recent games which would be a better intro into (3rd person) WRPGs would be The Witcher 2 (I have never played the first one and I never felt like I needed too since the game gives you all you need to know.) Also Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning, I'm 90+ hours into this game. It has a great combat system, looks gorgeous, and makes it easy on you when you level up. (Plus if you don't like what you chose while leveling up you can respec almost anytime you want)

Dragon Age Origins is fun, but I wouldn't recommend it to someone who is new to WRPGs, you need to spend a lot of time setting up systems. Also Mass Effect 3 is pretty streamlined if you want an WRPG that is polished to the point of a JRPG.

My laptop is crap for gaming. 6th gen games are about all it can handle.

My bad. I forgot that the Wii was your console. If you are planning on getting a Wii U, then you can try Mass Effect 3, which would be the easiest WRPG to play since most of the stat choices are streamlined. (You only choose powers) Though the action based combat is very good and its a very fun ride. Plus the ending shouldn't upset you since you haven't been playing the games over 7 years. (It's still a better ending than most games, IMHO)

See, i didn't have problems choosing stat growth (except that i loaded Revan too heavily with Dexterity early on, and stupidly kept doing it after he stopped using ranged weapons). I did have problems choosing powers, since i had very little idea of what some of the powers did.



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Around the Network
Alphachris said:
Scoobes said:
AllfatherStarr said:
One thing that needs to be kept in mind is Combat Mechanics is what makes or breaks a JRPG.
History shows us that there are well-loved WRPGs which have a less than perfect combat system, but a JRPG with a sh***y combat system is not even worth a single playthrough. Not because of a difference in standards of either fanbase but because good WRPGs offer the gamer considerably more beyond the actual combat. Actually, imo, this has become more and more apparent over recent years. JRPGs of yore had a certain charm about them, which their more contemporary counterparts somewhat lack( in most cases)

I completely disagree. The most important thing about a JRPG to me is the story and having an interesting world/lore. I loved a lot of the older Final Fantasy games but the battle system was something I was willing to put up with, not something I really enjoyed engaging in. The story and the wider mythology was what kept me playing.

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.

 

What Zarx says in his reply to you is very true, Planescape Torment is often regarded as one of the few examples of truly brilliant storytelling in games. The story is so highly regarded that the novel version of the story was included in the New York Times 100 novels of the century (last century ). You'd probably enjoy it quite a bit. The combat in the game is also mostly avoidable (there will be some combat though) depending on your stats so even if you don't like the battle system, there are ways to play through with minimal fighting..

Anyway, we agree that the most important factor of a JRPG is story and characters but we disagree as to how a game tells that story. Final Fantasy XIII for instance, for me, was just too reliant on cut scenes with little to expand on the storyline beyond them (other then the datalog which is a chore to read). If you don't enjoy the way the story is told in those cut scenes (as was the case with me for large chuncks of the game) then the enjoyment of the story is damaged. With little else

I know JRPGs have little room for story influence, but most have places to explore and mini quests/easter egg moments to expand on the mythology. Some can even help to further expand the background of certain characters. In FFVII for instance, there are a few moments where you can have mini-flashbacks that are completely optional but give a good amount of back story.

WRPGs on the other hand have gone the route of giving player influence in the story. It's technically closer to true old school RPGs although no video game can stay true to the pen and paper RPGs as they'd need a Dungeon Master and no AI is capable of pulling off that feat. The Elder scrolls games are a strange example because the story is meant to be tailored completely to the player experience. You have complete choice in how your personal story plays out, but I can understand that if you want to experience a tight, well contructed story, it can be disappointing.

Other WRPGs though can still give a story with great depth whilst still giving the player choice. Mass Effect 1-3 are a good example of this as is Deus Ex Human Revolution and Witcher 2. They all have storylines with depth and a range of interesting characters.



adriane23 said:
Scoobes said:
adriane23 said:
gergroy said:
adriane23 said:
The poor play mechanics of WRPGs (PC RPGs as I like to call them) has always been my major complaint with them. 95% of WRPGs have TERRIBLE battle systems and at least half of them can't even get navigation around the game world correct. It always baffled me how so many people could dismiss this aspect of these games and still consider them great. And don't get me started on the amount of bugs.


interesting, I would say the same about JRPG's.  Especially if you compare recent JRPG's to recent WRPG's it would be the other way around.  

No it wouldn't. Most WRPGs of the past 6 years have generally sloppy play mechanics. The few that do have good gameplay mehcanics are the Mass Effect games, The Witcher games,  and Kingdoms of Amalur. The rest are just content to have you flail your arms wildly with a weapon in your hand.

EDIT: Dragon's Dogma, Demon's Souls, Dark SOuls, and even FFXIII have great play mechanics, because they've been doing that aspect of gaming very well for several decades now.

The only WRPGs this gen that I can think fit that description are Diablo III and possibly Dungeon Siege 3... which is because they're pure hack n' slash. Even the Elder Scrolls games aren't like that.

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. 

If you play either Skyrim or Oblivion in the way you described at any normal difficulty then you'd die... a lot. Your descriptions are over simplifying the combat mechanics. In the same vein, I could argue that most JRPGs are just about selecting a menu command which would be grossly ignorant. I suppose your descriptions might be true after you've played and leveled up for ages and made/enchanted your equipment to the point of being godlike. But before that, you have to be careful in the way you engage in combat. It also completely ignores the stealth mechanic which alters the way you approach dungeons/enemies.

I'd also argue that the 3 hack n' slash games you mentioned actually have a lot of depth to their combat then mindless button bashing if played at any difficulty higher then Easy. I say this because I actually enjoy the mindless button bashing/style and have to play on Easy



Alphachris said:
Scoobes said:

I completely disagree. The most important thing about a JRPG to me is the story and having an interesting world/lore. I loved a lot of the older Final Fantasy games but the battle system was something I was willing to put up with, not something I really enjoyed engaging in. The story and the wider mythology was what kept me playing.

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.

I find it hard to remember a game I got more immersed in the world and which and it'slore than Morrowind. I like many JRPGS (although I admitedly haven't layed many of the newer ones), but I fell more connected to the game world when I'm not being strictly directed (which happens in plenty WRPGS as well, sure).



Nem said:
WRPG's are generally more buggy, but make up for it with open-endness.

JRPG's are very tight on bugs but also tend to throw you in very linear paths you cant derive from. From a testing point of view, the JRPG is alot easier to optimise.


Hmm? I don't know about that, that more pertains to the new jrpgs, more specifically ff13.

Of course we cannot forgot the openess of Dark/Demon's Souls and Xenoblade.



           

blkfish92 said:
Nem said:
WRPG's are generally more buggy, but make up for it with open-endness.

JRPG's are very tight on bugs but also tend to throw you in very linear paths you cant derive from. From a testing point of view, the JRPG is alot easier to optimise.


Hmm? I don't know about that, that more pertains to the new jrpgs, more specifically ff13.

Of course we cannot forgot the openess of Dark/Demon's Souls and Xenoblade.


Pretty much every FF is more linear than a typical wrpg, atleast in the past... when FF7 was released on PC (where western RPG's used to be from). one of the major complaints with the PC (WRPG crowd at the time) was that it was too linear, and that square/eidos did a lazy port. Thats why it scored around an 8/10 average for PC at the time.

Not just level design either. WRPG's like planescape torment, baulder's gate weren't completly linear from a story perspective either, with cause and effect from actions. Again it's generally speaking. Dragon Quest V lets you pick your wife, FF7 let's your pick a date on the ferris wheel, FF10 lets you pick who rides on the snowmobile, Chrono Trigger lets you do a lot of crazy things, Tactics Ogre lets you majorly effects things like a WRPG.

And many WRPG's have become increasingly linear. There are JRPG's and WJRPG's that overlap in design, like say anachronox (WRPG that's like a JRPG), or demon soul's generally considered a (JRPG that's like a WRPG). For whatever reason this thread is about generalizations despite both sides bringing a variety of linear/non-linear styles.