Kirby007 is overrated and I give this thread ONE FLAG

Tag - "No trolling on my watch!"

Kirby007 is overrated and I give this thread ONE FLAG

Tag - "No trolling on my watch!"

JRPGs aren't as good as WRPGs because:
- Most plots are generic, and the writing is crap when compared to WRPGs.
- The storytelling is archaic and the story itself is almost never integrated in the gameplay.
- Lack of real choices/consequences and player/character interactivity
- The combat systems are more shallow, less depth.
Well, for the most part, anyone saying that they like JRPGs for the story wouldn't know a good story if it smacked them over the head. JRPG stories are usually trite, saccharine, and wholly predictable.
That said, the "Press X to attack"-type battle system can be fun if the designers put some thought into it. Like, say, in Persona 3, where you only control your main character directly, and you control the rest of your characters on the fly with a bunch of AI selections. But most JRPG designers don't really innovate, because a generic game in the genre already has a guaranteed audience.
"'Casual games' are something the 'Game Industry' invented to explain away the Wii success instead of actually listening or looking at what Nintendo did. There is no 'casual strategy' from Nintendo. 'Accessible strategy', yes, but ‘casual gamers’ is just the 'Game Industry''s polite way of saying what they feel: 'retarded gamers'."
-Sean Malstrom
| Garcian Smith said: Well, for the most part, anyone saying that they like JRPGs for the story wouldn't know a good story if it smacked them over the head. JRPG stories are usually trite, saccharine, and wholly predictable. That said, the "Press X to attack"-type battle system can be fun if the designers put some thought into it. Like, say, in Persona 3, where you only control your main character directly, and you control the rest of your characters on the fly with a bunch of AI selections. But most JRPG designers don't really innovate, because a generic game in the genre already has a guaranteed audience. |
Not the ones I play.
Why do I like them?
Because they are awesome
/end thread


| Stats87 said: Why do I like them? Because they are awesome /end thread |
thats the end of your input not the end of the thread
"I think people should define the word crap" - Kirby007
Join the Prediction League http://www.vgchartz.com/predictions
Instead of seeking to convince others, we can be open to changing our own minds, and seek out information that contradicts our own steadfast point of view. Maybe it’ll turn out that those who disagree with you actually have a solid grasp of the facts. There’s a slight possibility that, after all, you’re the one who’s wrong.
sc94597 said:
Not the ones I play.
|
Which ones might those be?
"'Casual games' are something the 'Game Industry' invented to explain away the Wii success instead of actually listening or looking at what Nintendo did. There is no 'casual strategy' from Nintendo. 'Accessible strategy', yes, but ‘casual gamers’ is just the 'Game Industry''s polite way of saying what they feel: 'retarded gamers'."
-Sean Malstrom
| Garcian Smith said: Well, for the most part, anyone saying that they like JRPGs for the story wouldn't know a good story if it smacked them over the head. JRPG stories are usually trite, saccharine, and wholly predictable. That said, the "Press X to attack"-type battle system can be fun if the designers put some thought into it. Like, say, in Persona 3, where you only control your main character directly, and you control the rest of your characters on the fly with a bunch of AI selections. But most JRPG designers don't really innovate, because a generic game in the genre already has a guaranteed audience. |
Not sure which ones your playing but I haven't played any that are particularly sweet(as in sugary type sweet/cutesy).
sc94597 said:
Not the ones I play.
|
For the most, I only play JRPGs that have good stories. When I found out Blue Dragon had a generic story and characters, I was completely turned off from the game.