M&L´s battle system > PM´s battle system

Actually, the Japanese and Western being references to locations are precisely what those definitions are. If an RPG is made in Japan, it is Japanese. If it is made in the West it is Western. The regions are not genres. There are many RPG sub-genres such as turn-based RPGs, action RPGs, MMO RPGs, strategy RPGs, etc...

Little surprised to see Persona 4 way up there.

Also never understood the love for Chrono Trigger. It felt average to me; it did nothing wrong, but at the same time, it really didn't do much to wow me.

Such a confusion is common. A genre identification tells you something about the game itself. The JRPG / WRPG distinction tells you something about the game's design team, and by extension their design philosophy. There is a difference, albeit a subtle one.

I would say that stereotypically the JRPG-WRPG distinction includes a genre distinction, but this is definitely not a hard or fast rule. Stereotypically JRPGs have pre-designed characters going about scripted events in a closed or limited environment that is as polished as possible (Final Fantasy). WRPGs have customizable characters going along in an open, sand-box world (Elder Scrolls). Of course, there are tons of exceptions. Dragon's Dogma and Witcher both leap to mind as games where few of these rules apply.

They're sterotypes that more often than not do a poor job of explaining what a game's content is actually like. A decent classification shouldn't leave a layman thinking "and how is one's gameplay different from the other?" Nothing clear cut like first-person shooter vs. third-person shooter.

orniletter said: hunter_alien said: No JRPG will ever have the critical, commercial and cultural impact that FFVII had/has. Spin it as much as you want, this game will be remembered as the cornerstone of the genre and storytelling in gaming. So I vote for FFVII Pokemon Red and Blue disagree !

Even tough Pokemon is by far the biggest RPG franchise, when people are talking JRPGs they tend to forget about it. And there is a reason why. The simplistic yet addictive nature of the game makes it mostly one of a kind in its own genre.

FFVII on the other hand is the purest and most known game in the JRPG genre. It did not have the same sales as a main Pokemon game, but there is a reason why it almost allways makes the top 10 lists of gaming sites.

What you say about Suikoden 2... is so true!

You're not making any sense. Just because a region makes games a certain way doesn't justify a label like that. God of War play differently than Devil May Cry and has a different style, but that doesn't mean we classify them as W-Hack and Slash and J-Hack and Slash.

I would call an Australian RPG whatever it's play style dictates, be it tactical/PC style RPGs (what you define as WRPG), turn-based RPG, strategy RPG, action RPG, or whatever. If Australian devs started "championing" a specific style of RPG, it doesn't make a new style of RPG called ARPG or some other similarly stupid moniker.

Persona 4 second, while persona 5 probably will be a mobile game. Sega >_>

The terms themselves are the problem, because they require detailed explanation in order to make any sense. And they reek of laziness and generalization, especially in the modern RPG market.