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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - New name for JRPG

Million said:
STOP THE POST RATING , WHEN WILL THIS STOP !!!.

I give this post a 3



http://www.vgchartz.com/games/userreviewdisp.php?id=261

That is VGChartz LONGEST review. And it's NOT Cute Kitten DS

Around the Network
memory2zack said:

True, but many jRPGs are still story-driven RPGs, although with few freedom of choice, you can customize your characters the way you want, from the weapons he will wield to the skills he will learn and also have various paths. They just don´t that much of an alinear path like western RPGs.

Also, an important factor is chaos/luck (rolling the dice) which most RPGs have, but generally Action RPGs lack.

Don't you mean strategy?  There are Action RPGs that require some strategy.  Reflexes are part of the strategy

 



memory2zack said:

True, but many jRPGs are still story-driven RPGs, although with few freedom of choice, you can customize your characters the way you want, from the weapons he will wield to the skills he will learn and also have various paths. They just don´t that much of an alinear path like western RPGs.

 Also, an important factor is chaos/luck (rolling the dice) which most RPGs have, but generally Action RPGs lack.


 What is funny about the view of RPGs as stats, dice, and chance is that in P&P gaming, these things only exist to accustom players to thinking about their actions in the terms of the world they are in.  Dice and chance exist to force players to consider their actions since there are potentially negative consequences of their actions.  Stats and chance, though, don't make it role playing.  The story is unprovided by the game.  Players and the GM bring that to the game.  In a JRPG, the stats, chance, and story are already provided.  The player is not taking a role.  They are, however, making decisions as to which characters they bring to fight and what strategy they will use to fight.  Again, much more of a strategy game.

I give that post a 9.6. 



Thank god for the disable signatures option.

I played the Witcher too, but from the isometric view which wasn´t action, but more strategic.

What do you mean chance is already provided? If you miss an attack or a spell is interrupted and so on or depending on the skill you use, you still take a risk and it can have a detrimentous effect. If you play Vagrant S tory you´ll see what bad things can happen.

Depending on which jRPG you play, you can have direct or indirect  input on stats.



Profcrab said:
Kasz216 said:
Profcrab said:
Kasz216 said:
rocketpig said:
DMeisterJ said:
I give the OP a 0.1

I like the way we rationalize JRPG, and we should keep it that way.

It's like when Soriku tried to say that casual = Non-traditional.

Why fix something that ain't broken?

Because most JRPGs aren't really "role-playing games"?


Most RPGs don't involve Roleplaying anymore in general.

I miss the days of the nameless protaganist. Even the Voiceless protaganest is often better then the main characters who are just idiots. I can't empathize and feel myself in the role of an idiot.

Hard to get around that when you've got constant voice acting though.


In video games there will never be true open choice. The pure attempt making RPG video games comes from Bethesda, however, that can also show the limitation of the medium in that respect. If a game has a story, your options will always be limited. However, a video game RPG can have the character, within the confines of the setting, reflect some of the players whims. This does mean that the story has to have more avenues and options. It will never be a pure RPG though. Most JRPGs though don't have any of that choice that would define an RPG in the most basic sense.

I give that post a 9.7.


They rarely gave you meaningful choices by forcing your hand... but the main character stayed more "everyman". Very few times did your main character do something where you said "why the hell would you do that..."
and make some REALLY dumb choice.

For example with a nameless protaganist you often got the choice of say a character is trying to lead you into an ambush... and it couldn't be any more obvious.

You can actually choose to distrust the person... and then they pull out a knife on some kid or something, and your lead into the ambush anyway.

vs current RPGS where people get led into the ambsuh following the guys long black hat and cape... while the villains keeps saying "you'll really get the POINT!" twirling his thin mustached the whole time with the other hand holding a big sack of money with dollar signs on it.


One game I played recently that walks the Action Game/RPG border is The Witcher. What was interesting about the game is that some of the decisions you made in the game completely locked off aspects of the game. In fact, it is entirely possible that you would not know what opportunity you just missed. Sometimes it affected small things and other times larger things (like one of the games 3 endings). Moving any story forward, however is going to deprive you of many of the choices you would make in that situation. Again, there will never be a pure RPG on computers/consoles. Even if there was, people would probably get bored of it.

I give that post 9.6.


 Fallout comes pretty close to that i'd say.  It's not as awesome as with a traditional tabletop game where you can literally do anything... but it comes close.



Around the Network
rocketpig said:
memory2zack said:
Also, in RPGs there´s a need to be a starting point and a goal with a strong story and plot catch the player´s attention. Otherwise you get sidetracked and wander pointlessly. P&P RPGs always had a begin and an ending, and didn´t have any "sidequests".

Obviously you never role-played in any of my parties. We never accomplished shit. It wall all "side quests" that we generally made up on the fly, usually resulting in at least one dead party member and at least 75% of the rest of the party jailed for one reason or another.


 Heh that's how mine tend to go as well.  Though people rarely die.



Soriku said:
rocketpig said:
memory2zack said:
Also, in RPGs there´s a need to be a starting point and a goal with a strong story and plot catch the player´s attention. Otherwise you get sidetracked and wander pointlessly. P&P RPGs always had a begin and an ending, and didn´t have any "sidequests".

Obviously you never role-played in any of my parties. We never accomplished shit. It wall all "side quests" that we generally made up on the fly, usually resulting in at least one dead party member and at least 75% of the rest of the party jailed for one reason or another.


Lol! Sad but true (especially the jailed part).


Well, that just opens up a new and interesting side quest called "Jailbreak!"

My personal favorite. 




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

memory2zack said:

I played the Witcher too, but from the isometric view which wasn´t action, but more strategic.

What do you mean chance is already provided? If you miss an attack or a spell is interrupted and so on or depending on the skill you use, you still take a risk and it can have a detrimentous effect. If you play Vagrant S tory you´ll see what bad things can happen.

Depending on which jRPG you play, you can have direct or indirect  input on stats.


 Sorry, that was a goofy wording.  What I meant to say was that the rules, stats, and story are provided.  The element of chance is also present.  So, it is more like a strategy game where you must decide which skill to use but there is the chance it may not work.  What I am saying basically that JRPGs use the elements of P&P games that are not actual roleplaying, the stats, rules, and chance.  The story, which is the role-playing part, is entirely provided for you with little choice required by the player.  The analogy, if run backwards, would be a GM of a P&P game that handed you your character sheet, did all the conversations for you, but had you handle picking skills for the character, choosing which skill to use in combat, and picking which enemy to attack.

I give that post a 9.7. 



Thank god for the disable signatures option.

rocketpig said:
Soriku said:
rocketpig said:
memory2zack said:
Also, in RPGs there´s a need to be a starting point and a goal with a strong story and plot catch the player´s attention. Otherwise you get sidetracked and wander pointlessly. P&P RPGs always had a begin and an ending, and didn´t have any "sidequests".

Obviously you never role-played in any of my parties. We never accomplished shit. It wall all "side quests" that we generally made up on the fly, usually resulting in at least one dead party member and at least 75% of the rest of the party jailed for one reason or another.


Lol! Sad but true (especially the jailed part).


Well, that just opens up a new and interesting side quest called "Jailbreak!"

My personal favorite. 


Man, when I was scanning this thread, I thought I read "an interesting sidequest called 'Jailbait' ".  That would have been for more interesting :P  My disappointment is *palpable*



Profcrab said:


Sorry, that was a goofy wording. What I meant to say was that the rules, stats, and story are provided. The element of chance is also present. So, it is more like a strategy game where you must decide which skill to use but there is the chance it may not work. What I am saying basically that JRPGs use the elements of P&P games that are not actual roleplaying, the stats, rules, and chance. The story, which is the role-playing part, is entirely provided for you with little choice required by the player. The analogy, if run backwards, would be a GM of a P&P game that handed you your character sheet, did all the conversations for you, but had you handle picking skills for the character, choosing which skill to use in combat, and picking which enemy to attack.

I give that post a 9.7.


Maybe that´s what defines RPGs in Japan and Asia. I think we should better ask japanese RPG veterans about their definition of RPG.

Also, chance=\ luck. Maybe a better wording would be gamble. Although chance and gamble are close, with the former the player knows the percentage of success, whereas in gambling chaos rules meaning its either unpredictable or too complex to predict the success rate.