If anything the writing in JRPGs are usually bad. The characters have poorly fleshed out thoughts and there is no depth to the actual story itself. Linear also doesn't mean that it's quality either. Memorable story is subjective and I thought that Fallout 3 had just as big of an impact emotionally compared to FF VII. Having choices means that I can mold whatever character I wish and that's a good thing. Dragon Quest and Dark Cloud also didn't have very engaging stories either due to the fact that it was your stereotypical JRPG beat up the bad guy and save the world generic crap but WRPGs are also guilty of this too but their more in depth about it so I can forgive them. Memorable characters aren't what makes an RPG. An RPG is about being able to assume multiple roles in a game. Design and art direction is also very subjective too since nobody likes japanese culture anymore in their games so I'll take western fantasy over cliche japanese centric fantasy. 

Boring gameplay (JRPG) vs Boring characters (WRPG)

It's your call ... Personally speaking though I think WRPGs excel in both categories. 

I honestly have to question if you've ever actually played a good JRPG. You say you've played Dragon Quest and Dark Cloud at least... they're okay. Your generalizations about the shallow thoughts and stories are simply silly. It's clear you prefer the ability to mold you own character, which few JRPGs allow. But that really seems to be the only legitimate point you make.

Depends on what you mean by good ... If you mean Relevant JRPGs like older Final Fantasy's then sure but if you mean niche crap such as shadow hearts or suikoden then absolutely not. 

Not to mention that you also generalize again and say WRPGs share the same boring characters and shallow stories as JRPGs, but WRPGs get a free pass because "their more in depth" or something. I'm not sure if you're referring to mechanics or lore or what with that statement, but it sure seems odd to me.

The lore definitely one of the reasons why I can let WRPGs pass with cliche stories seeing as how they give so much more background to the story like Dragon Age Origins and they actually make sense compared to a lot of the JRPGs. 

RPGS being about assuming multiple roles is an opinion for sure. I don't see the inherent negative about assuming a singular role and playing as that person, or even how this is relevant to the dichotomy of Japan and the West.

RPGs assuming multiple roles is a FACT! What do you think makes an RPG differentiated from the rest of the genres ? Assuming a singular role means that the so called game isn't an RPG! An RPG can do without all of it's common mechanics system such as leveling and equipments as long as the player can assume two or more specialized roles such as warrior or a mage for example. 

I also really don't understand the assertion that "nobody likes Japanese culture anymore in their games", considering the fact that games like Final Fantasy still sell quite well in the West. Actually, far better than they do in Japan. Not to mention the fact that obviously many of us do quite enjoy a bit of Japanese flair and your generalizations are again not useful.

No, my generalizations actually have a basis and it's quite clear that many japanese culture centric games usually end up floping but Final Fantasy is an exception and not the rule since it actually has a fanbase generous enough to buy the games despite the fact that the franchise is stagnating. 

In regards to your other comment that I'll just replay to here, I don't understand why you think JRPGs have less evolved combat that WRPGs. Just because more WRPGs are real time and have guns? There are many real time action JRPGS and many innovations on the classic turn based formula that can make combat quite compelling and deep.

Except realtime combat is simply more engaging based off of the success of WRPGs so far. The only relevant RPGs left so far that does turn based combat are Pokemon and Final Fantasy. It's clear that not many people actually enjoy turn based combat anymore. Even Square Enix opted out for action based combat in FF XV.

And when you implied that Kingdom Hearts and Dragon Quest faded into obscurity, I think you must have forgotten that there hasn't been a full KH game in a decade, but 358/2 Days sold 2 million copies. And the most recent real Dragon Quest entry (IX) was the highest selling one of the entire franchise.

KH is fading into obscurity seeing as how it's prequel did only pulled around 2 million compared to the first installments 5 million. What makes Dragon Quest X not a real Dragon Quest game ? Despite the fact that it's not single player it shouldn't be counted out seeing as how MMO's are actually more expensive to produce. 

Lastly, calling Japanese fantasy generic in a comparison against western fantasy is just too rich, buddy. You can slog through generic examples of western fantasy for years. There are even tons of Japanese games that are far more western fantasy than Japanese fantasy.

The last time I checked this was about JRPGs and most of them are influenced by japanese culture. Generic anime styles is the last thing I want from a game. 

All in all, your method of total generalization is simply a poor way to make an argument and blatantly ignores all the high points Japanese games have had in favor of taking punches at the generic low hanging fruit. And I find your insistence that sales = quality in a reliable sense highly suspect. It implies that many people must like something in order for it to be good. Something must recieve a massive marketing budget and be released on as many systems as possible in order to be good. Pokemon is the highest selling JRPG (and RPG at all) by a country mile, but how many people (who have played more RPGs than just Pokemon) cite each one of them as the very best games in the genre, touched in undeniable quality only by oh-so-glorious Skyrim?

Is this person saying it's the best Final Fantasy or best RPG? I could see someone making a case that it's the best Final Fantasy, though I wouldn't agree, but best RPG ever is just so incredibly ludicrous you'd have to be ignorantof so much.