Because you don't what you're talking about.

And Western turn based games like Ultima pre-date JRPGs.

Wich is the difference betwen both of 'em?

The "W" and "J"

Who the hell is PRofcrab and why should I care?  Name me all the relevant freeform video RPGs and how they distinguish themselves from other genres that involve conflict.  How do they relate to the vast majority of video RPGs thus far created?

Profcrab is the person you quoted above.  You're a quick one aren't you?

Thak you! (I guess...)

I prefer JRPG's. They are longer [more bang for my buck].
And I usually perfer the combat in Jrpg's. The combat in WRPG can usually end up felling like a hack in slash... or in nowadays...... a shooter.....

 It's just that I thought that you were talking about someone who holds some kind of special knowledge of RPGs, not some poster I see regularly on this site.  Or at least a mod, since they seem to be the few who have any kind of awareness of the hobby before the PS days.

But that doesn't answer my question.

I don't see numbers and stats as RPG playing.  By that rational, every game that has stats in any form, even a game like Ghost Recon or Rainbow Six (if you ever played any of the earlier games), is an RPG.

Technically, no video game can be an RPG unless the story is completely influenced and dependant on the character.  However, they can give the player some choice in the matter with some other potential outcomes.  If an RPG is primarily defined by its stats and numbers then the name needs to be changed because the "Role Playing" doesn't really describe it.

Many WRPGs have, at least in some form, tried to emulate more of the Role Playing aspect.  JRPGs emulate only the "rolling" aspect of it.  To me, if I see a video game that has me just pick stats and weapons, I see it as more of a strategy game than a RPG.  This is how I see JRPGs, more as strategy.

Btw, I love your arguing technique of putting "Wrong" before your supporting information.  I think it makes you look like you have big e-penis.  Hope that is working out for you.

I give that post a 9.5.

Stats in an RPG are a different animal than stats in a tactical shooter, and serve different purposes and are integrated much differently.  RPGs and adventure games both have stories and character interaction, are they the same?   There are no behind the scenes random "die rolls" in a shooter that determine who goes first or when (dependant on certain stats), if they hit or miss (dependant on certain stats), how many points of damage are done, etc.   But it's not just about stats, it's also the overall battle system and how it's weighted by those stats and die rolls in every way that distinguishes the genre.  Throw plot progression in there, and there is enough to qualify at least early JRPGs as true video RPGs

But I will say that there are WRPGs that are much truer, in terms of interaction and battle parameters, which is something I've never argued against.  But I will not say that story or a few dialog choices are more vital to the genre.

Personally I define RPGs by their relation to its roots in tabletop wargames like Chainmail (which are also the roots of pen and paper RPGS, which are...), so that's where I'm coming from, and the fact that this type of battle system, along with some narrative is what distinguishes the genre from everything else. 

And sorry if I come off like a dick, since you are logical and have a grasp of the genre beyond the story whores.  More than these fools who think the Japanese did turn based combat first, or WRPGs are easy or just hack n' slash, which is utterly absurd.