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

Forums - Gaming - Silent Hill 2,3 producer says America ahead of Japan in terms of game dev

rocketpig on 02 April 2008

Except the only change made for RE4 was the camera. The controls were still exactly the same. Up/down = forward/backwards and left/right = turn. R = aim, A (GC controls) = fire. Same controls in RE1, same controls in RE4. The difference is that it was a fixed camera in RE1, and an OTS camera in RE4. Hardly a "ripoff" of Splinter Cell's controls. Going by your logic, Splinter Cell ripped off of RE1.


I'm not talking about button placement. Who cares if the buttons to fire, reload, etc. are the same? I'm talking about the over-the-shoulder, zoom in to target, reticle-style gameplay. SC was the first game I remember doing it well and RE4 isn't much different (though it does put a little twist on SC's controls).

You can't seriously believe that RE4's control scheme is anything remotely similar to RE1/2/3. Capcom completely changed the way you control the game in RE4. And it's pretty damned similar to the SC series. Almost like a hybrid Silent Hill/Splinter Cell approach, though slower and more methodical than either.




Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/

Around the Network
naznatips on 02 April 2008
Torillian said:

@Naznatips

But you are talking about diversity in story Naz, where he was talking about diversity in gameplay. Sure all of those games had completely different stories, but none of them really openned up gameplay like Rocketpig seems to enjoy. Personally I do not like open world games particularly more than linear games, but for someone that likes open world more I can definitely understand how he sees Japan as the land of old fogy gameplay.


Er... yeah, you definitely don't want to get into gameplay in RPGs... that comparison ends even worse...

Turn-based - Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest
Hack-and-slash - Kingdom Hearts, FFCC
Turn-based strategy - Fire Emblem, Jeanne D'Arc, Ogre Battle, etc.
Side-Scrolling action - Odin Sphere, Oboro Muramasa
Real-Time turn based (Every time you move, your enemy moves) - Mysterious Dungeon
Card-Battle - Baten Kaitos
3rd person action strategy - Valkyria Chronicles
Turn-based action (characters move freely during their turns) - Eternal Sonata
Linear Action or instanced action - Tales of
Turn-based Action Combo system - Valkyrie Profile
Stride Cross Battle System (This one is a bit complex, but I'll explain if you want) - The World Ends With You

There are so many more but those are the ones off the top of my head...



naznatips on 02 April 2008
rocketpig said:

You say no real advancement has been made in 5 years... I disagree. The complete openness of Oblivion (to a fault IMO) and the cinematic nature & dialogue trees of Mass Effect added very different twists to the genre. Besides, you can't expect radical changes a la KOTOR to happen every year. It may be five years since KOTOR released, but when was the last time a JRPG radically altered gameplay style that much? 10 years? 15? Longer?

And you can pick on the storylines of WRPGs; I won't disagree with you. But stories don't greatly alter the overall gameplay. It's just a different story but the rest of the game progresses as it always has. Differing worlds and art styles are nice and all but when it comes to core gameplay mechanics, they really don't matter at all. I'm talking about real progression of the genre, not a few new shiny bells and whistles with a different style slapped on the top of it. And in that regard, JRPGs have been horribly stagnant since the transition to 3D. I still like many of the games and play them but I'm not expecting anything radically new when I purchase a JRPG nowadays. I expect it to be extremely formulaic and linear, just as those games were 12 years ago.


Now see, I don't consider an open world a "real progression of the genre" if that open world adds nothing to the enjoyment of the game.  Hell, if you consider Zelda an RPG like some do, open world was done in 1986 in Japan.  That said, it's great that Western devs are doing open world in their RPGs... no what else are they gonna do?  Seriously, Oblivion added nothing to the actual gameplay of the franchise.   Mass Effect evolved gameplay some but it was really just the next logical step from KOTOR's gameplay.  

I need diversity in my games.  I need a variety of gameplay styles, plots, settings, characters.  I can't play the game game over and over.  While Western Devs are remaking Lord of the Rings for the 500 billionth time I'll be playing unique games like Persona.  The stagnation of the WRPG genre has really pushed me away, and although I have every intention of buying Mass Effect in its PC incarnation, I'm extremely disappointed with most Western Devs and their lack of diversity on the RPG genre.  



naznatips on 02 April 2008

double post.



rocketpig on 02 April 2008
naznatips said:
Torillian said:

@Naznatips

But you are talking about diversity in story Naz, where he was talking about diversity in gameplay. Sure all of those games had completely different stories, but none of them really openned up gameplay like Rocketpig seems to enjoy. Personally I do not like open world games particularly more than linear games, but for someone that likes open world more I can definitely understand how he sees Japan as the land of old fogy gameplay.


Er... yeah, you definitely don't want to get into gameplay in RPGs... that comparison ends even worse...

Turn-based, turn based action - Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest
Hack-and-slash - Kingdom Hearts, FFCC
Turn-based strategy - Fire Emblem, Jeanne D'Arc, Ogre Battle, etc.
Side-Scrolling action - Odin Sphere, Oboro Muramasa
Real-Time turn based (Every time you move, your enemy moves) - Mysterious Dungeon
Card-Battle - Baten Kaitos
3rd person action strategy - Valkyria Chronicles
Turn-based action (characters move freely during their turns) - Eternal Sonata
Linear Action or instanced action - Tales of
Turn-based Action Combo system - Valkyrie Profile
Stride Cross Battle System (This one is a bit complex, but I'll explain if you want) - The World Ends With You

There are so many more but those are the ones off the top of my head...


While the Japanese do several different forms of RPGs, have any of them really changed in the past 10 years?

And you're seriously undercutting western developers if you think their gameplay doesn't vary greatly. You can go from anything like Oblivion to some RTS games (some containing RPG elements) to the sim genre to Mass Effect/KOTOR to World of Warcraft to some of the older turn-based stuff.

There's a lot of variation there, it's just that some of it isn't labeled "RPG" even though there are heavy elements of RPGs in them. Shit, you can even include some shooters like System Shock in there if you want. I think your view of what RPG means is different than mine. Many western devs are bending genres and end up kinda in their own realm by mixing and matching multiple game elements. Just because it's called an "RPG" doesn't mean it qualifies as such and some of the games not considered RPGs have significant enough elements of the genre to deserve recognition.




Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/

Around the Network
rocketpig on 02 April 2008
naznatips said:
rocketpig said:

You say no real advancement has been made in 5 years... I disagree. The complete openness of Oblivion (to a fault IMO) and the cinematic nature & dialogue trees of Mass Effect added very different twists to the genre. Besides, you can't expect radical changes a la KOTOR to happen every year. It may be five years since KOTOR released, but when was the last time a JRPG radically altered gameplay style that much? 10 years? 15? Longer?

And you can pick on the storylines of WRPGs; I won't disagree with you. But stories don't greatly alter the overall gameplay. It's just a different story but the rest of the game progresses as it always has. Differing worlds and art styles are nice and all but when it comes to core gameplay mechanics, they really don't matter at all. I'm talking about real progression of the genre, not a few new shiny bells and whistles with a different style slapped on the top of it. And in that regard, JRPGs have been horribly stagnant since the transition to 3D. I still like many of the games and play them but I'm not expecting anything radically new when I purchase a JRPG nowadays. I expect it to be extremely formulaic and linear, just as those games were 12 years ago.


Now see, I don't consider an open world a "real progression of the genre" if that open world adds nothing to the enjoyment of the game. Hell, if you consider Zelda an RPG like some do, open world was done in 1986 in Japan. That said, it's great that Western devs are doing open world in their RPGs... no what else are they gonna do? Seriously, Oblivion added nothing to the actual gameplay of the franchise. Mass Effect evolved gameplay some but it was really just the next logical step from KOTOR's gameplay.

I need diversity in my games. I need a variety of gameplay styles, plots, settings, characters. I can't play the game game over and over. While Western Devs are remaking Lord of the Rings for the 500 billionth time I'll be playing unique games like Persona. The stagnation of the WRPG genre has really pushed me away, and although I have every intention of buying Mass Effect in its PC incarnation, I'm extremely disappointed with most Western Devs and their lack of diversity on the RPG genre.


I'm not saying that every RPG needs an open world but in the true definition of "RPG", some elements of choice are required. That's one of my biggest beefs with Japanese developers. Everyone throws around the term "role-playing", but how are you playing a role? You're doing exactly what the developer wanted you to do and moving through the game just how they want you to. You're just following along with a pre-determined outcome.

What I like best about WRPGs is that they are the true descendants of the pen-and-paper RPGs in varying degrees of control and choice. I miss that style of game and it's cool to see some developers keep it alive, though some are more successful than others (eyeing up you, Bethesda).

Now that devs are used to open-world settings, what are they going to do? Dunno. That's a good question. If the genre stalls at this point, that's their fault. But up to this point, the genre has been anything but stagnant since the BG2/Fallout days. It's been evolving on a consistent basis which is more than you can say for JRPGs. How different will FFXIII be from FFVII? In comparison, how different is Baldur's Gate 2 when compared to Mass Effect?

I understand your frustration with game worlds in WRPGs. I completely agree. Which brings me back to Fallout 3....

*stomps feet and gets mad again*

Okay, just gonna stop there. 




Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/

naznatips on 02 April 2008
rocketpig said:
naznatips said:
Torillian said:

@Naznatips

But you are talking about diversity in story Naz, where he was talking about diversity in gameplay. Sure all of those games had completely different stories, but none of them really openned up gameplay like Rocketpig seems to enjoy. Personally I do not like open world games particularly more than linear games, but for someone that likes open world more I can definitely understand how he sees Japan as the land of old fogy gameplay.


Er... yeah, you definitely don't want to get into gameplay in RPGs... that comparison ends even worse...

Turn-based, turn based action - Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest
Hack-and-slash - Kingdom Hearts, FFCC
Turn-based strategy - Fire Emblem, Jeanne D'Arc, Ogre Battle, etc.
Side-Scrolling action - Odin Sphere, Oboro Muramasa
Real-Time turn based (Every time you move, your enemy moves) - Mysterious Dungeon
Card-Battle - Baten Kaitos
3rd person action strategy - Valkyria Chronicles
Turn-based action (characters move freely during their turns) - Eternal Sonata
Linear Action or instanced action - Tales of
Turn-based Action Combo system - Valkyrie Profile
Stride Cross Battle System (This one is a bit complex, but I'll explain if you want) - The World Ends With You

There are so many more but those are the ones off the top of my head...


While the Japanese do several different forms of RPGs, have any of them really changed in the past 10 years?

And you're seriously undercutting western developers if you think their gameplay doesn't vary greatly. You can go from anything like Oblivion to some RTS games (some containing RPG elements) to the sim genre to Mass Effect/KOTOR to World of Warcraft to some of the older turn-based stuff.

There's a lot of variation there, it's just that some of it isn't labeled "RPG" even though there are heavy elements of RPGs in them. Shit, you can even include some shooters like System Shock in there if you want. I think your view of what RPG means is different than mine. Many western devs are bending genres and end up kinda in their own realm by mixing and matching multiple game elements. Just because it's called an "RPG" doesn't mean it qualifies as such and some of the games not considered RPGs have significant enough elements of the genre to deserve recognition.


Uh, no, I didn't even go into the bent view.

Real Time Strategy - King's Story
Sim - Rune Factory, FFCC WiiWare, also King's Story (combines both interestingly enough)
Adventure, Exploration - Fragile, and Zelda if you count it
etc....

Sorry Rocketpig.  You can have your opinions about what makes an RPG good, but in diversity of gameplay there is no opinion involved.  You're simply wrong.  If you want to try for a side-by-side comparison be my guest, but you won't win that one.  And yes, most of those changes were made within the last 5 years.  New RPG combat systems and gameplay are added every year.  To be fair, there are a lot more JRPGs than WRPGs so they have the opportunity to evolve faster, but thankfully they are evolving.



bobobologna on 02 April 2008
rocketpig said:
naznatips said:
Torillian said:

@Naznatips

But you are talking about diversity in story Naz, where he was talking about diversity in gameplay. Sure all of those games had completely different stories, but none of them really openned up gameplay like Rocketpig seems to enjoy. Personally I do not like open world games particularly more than linear games, but for someone that likes open world more I can definitely understand how he sees Japan as the land of old fogy gameplay.


Er... yeah, you definitely don't want to get into gameplay in RPGs... that comparison ends even worse...

Turn-based, turn based action - Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest
Hack-and-slash - Kingdom Hearts, FFCC
Turn-based strategy - Fire Emblem, Jeanne D'Arc, Ogre Battle, etc.
Side-Scrolling action - Odin Sphere, Oboro Muramasa
Real-Time turn based (Every time you move, your enemy moves) - Mysterious Dungeon
Card-Battle - Baten Kaitos
3rd person action strategy - Valkyria Chronicles
Turn-based action (characters move freely during their turns) - Eternal Sonata
Linear Action or instanced action - Tales of
Turn-based Action Combo system - Valkyrie Profile
Stride Cross Battle System (This one is a bit complex, but I'll explain if you want) - The World Ends With You

There are so many more but those are the ones off the top of my head...


While the Japanese do several different forms of RPGs, have any of them really changed in the past 10 years?

And you're seriously undercutting western developers if you think their gameplay doesn't vary greatly. You can go from anything like Oblivion to some RTS games (some containing RPG elements) to the sim genre to Mass Effect/KOTOR to World of Warcraft to some of the older turn-based stuff.

There's a lot of variation there, it's just that some of it isn't labeled "RPG" even though there are heavy elements of RPGs in them. Shit, you can even include some shooters like System Shock in there if you want. I think your view of what RPG means is different than mine. Many western devs are bending genres and end up kinda in their own realm by mixing and matching multiple game elements. Just because it's called an "RPG" doesn't mean it qualifies as such and some of the games not considered RPGs have significant enough elements of the genre to deserve recognition.


No offense, but you seem pretty close minded about Japanese developers and gameplay. The same arguments you use against Japanese developers, are probably the same arguments other people use against western developers. They think "typical FPS gameplay" without looking at any of the underlying gameplay mechanics. On the surface, most RPGs look like they play the same. But underneath I'm willing to bet there's a lot of variations of the core gameplay mechanics.

I hate it when people write off every FPS as just another FPS, and in the same way, I hate it when people write off every JRPG as just another JRPG.

Edit:  I'm not even that big of a JRPG fan. 



bobobologna on 02 April 2008
rocketpig said:
 

I'm not saying that every RPG needs an open world but in the true definition of "RPG", some elements of choice are required. That's one of my biggest beefs with Japanese developers. Everyone throws around the term "role-playing", but how are you playing a role? You're doing exactly what the developer wanted you to do and moving through the game just how they want you to. You're just following along with a pre-determined outcome.

What I like best about WRPGs is that they are the true descendants of the pen-and-paper RPGs in varying degrees of control and choice. I miss that style of game and it's cool to see some developers keep it alive, though some are more successful than others (eyeing up you, Bethesda).

Now that devs are used to open-world settings, what are they going to do? Dunno. That's a good question. If the genre stalls at this point, that's their fault. But up to this point, the genre has been anything but stagnant since the BG2/Fallout days. It's been evolving on a consistent basis which is more than you can say for JRPGs. How different will FFXIII be from FFVII? In comparison, how different is Baldur's Gate 2 when compared to Mass Effect?

I understand your frustration with game worlds in WRPGs. I completely agree. Which brings me back to Fallout 3....

*stomps feet and gets mad again*

Okay, just gonna stop there.


Yes, way to compare two games from the same franchise, to two games from completely different franchises.  Maybe you should have compared Baldur's Gate 1 to Baldur's Gate 2?  Or Planescape Torment?  Or Icewind Dale?  On the surface all those games look exactly the same.



rocketpig on 02 April 2008

Sorry Rocketpig. You can have your opinions about what makes an RPG good, but in diversity of gameplay there is no opinion involved. You're simply wrong. If you want to try for a side-by-side comparison be my guest, but you won't win that one. And yes, most of those changes were made within the last 5 years. New RPG combat systems and gameplay are added every year. To be fair, there are a lot more JRPGs than WRPGs so they have the opportunity to evolve faster, but thankfully they are evolving.


Well, as we mentioned, we're comparing a genre (JRPG) that gets 50+ releases a year across many platforms vs. another genre (WRPG) that gets 5 or so major releases and a handful of smaller ones across fewer platforms.

If we want to get into some of those genres you listed, I could start tossing out XBL/PSN games or smaller games on PC that fluff up the gameplay differences to a much larger number for the WRPG camp.

While some of the smaller sub-genres may be evolving, what major change have you seen in mainstream JRPGs over the past 10 years? I'm honestly curious because when I pop in FFXII, I see a game that take FFVII, puts a few minor twists on it (oooh, realtime! New stuff!), and is largely the same game.




Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/