With 2008 closing, I think this is an important argument to levy against Western reviewers, that, in a world where 10/10's seem to be handed out as quickly as pot at a Dave Matthews concert, that reviewers have un-evenly lobbied their critisisms of this beloved genre.

To some, such as myself, this is a great time to be a JRPG gamer. I've played about 8 JRPGs this gen on my X360 alone, and have a backlog of Infinite Undiscovery, and The Last Remnant on my X360. For my DS, it's a landslide of trying to get my meager library finished (FFIII, DQ4) - I still have a dozen 'good' JRPGs that have reached North America, before I begin to pick the more mediocre JRPGs available on the system.

Yet for the bountiful harvest we've been getting - which has slowly migrated to the Wii and PS3 as well, the reviewers seem to be weighted oh-so heavily against the stalwart genre.

Consider the GameRankings.com list of "best next-gen JRPGs" available for handhelds & consoles:

Now consider the top available WRPGs on consoles & PCs (I pulled a few recent PC games since there isn't a whole truckload of apt WRPGs on consoles alone):

Notice the difference? The top 5 WRPGs are all reviewed better than the best JRPG available on next-gen systems.

Am I the only one that feels that regardless of system, JRPGs seem to be getting a raw deal in the media review system? No, this isn't because The Last Remnant has a 65.0% average from 2 reviews, but because it seems that as time goes on, no console game has got a fair shake, and very few handheld games have, either.

Example: User reviews would have you believe that Valkyria Chronicles, Tales of Vesperia, and Lost Odyssey are 3 of the better JRPGs made in what seems like a long time. Yet the best-reviewed (VC) has a mere 85% ranking - despite it's genre-breaking factors (of which, I'd love to play this game).

Another factor to look at is the IP recognition between Western and Eastern RPGs: WRPGs have had a better success rate at garnering praise (such as Mass Effect, The Witcher, LOTR: Online - All over a short period of time) than the Eastern IP's that are new (only 3 JRPGs scored above an 85% - despite the fact I farmed 5 different systems).

Is the review system broke, or am I just a crazy JRPG fan? My girlfriend thinks JRPGs are the best thing since sliced bread - and she's very new to the JRPG scene. She's enthralled by Lost Odyssey, Dragon Quest VIII, and Kingdom Hearts.

Or are newer JRPGs currently out..Just worse than the Playstation 2 JRPGs? Part of the reason I'm posting this is due to a VGC-er arguing about my favoritsm of X360 JRPGs being pretty good (such as Blue Dragon, Lost Odyssey and Tales of Vesperia). He argued that said JRPGs couldn't hold a candle on PS1/2 RPGs. Yet despite his claims, I honestly can't say that there were a treasure trove of PS1/2 JRPGs I played that blew the current crop totally out of the water. Yes, I loved FFXII, DQVIII, FFVII, Kingdom Hearts 1/2 and FFT among others. Yet I still feel that the current crop does the masters of the past 10 years quite a bit of honor. Maybe not as good as the SNES era (of which I owned most, if not all of them), but still very good given years' past offerings.

So JRPG-ers (there are a lot of VGC), what do you think? Am I the only one that thinks that, regardless of system, revewiers have given JRPGs the cold shoulder? Not one has been critically reviewed as being close to the 5 best WRPGs in the past 3 years, yet I have certainly enjoyed the big WRPG offerings as much as the JRPG offerings of the past 3-4 years, as a PC, X360 and DS owner.

The problem is that Japanese RPGs have characteristics that don't appeal to the many Western gamers but appeal to the Japanese. The thing is that WRPGs just seems to appeal more to them than JRPGs.

I know TLR's reviews are dissapointing, but damn, you didn't have to write a novel about it.

You think any of those JRPG's actually deserve a 90+ average?...

Western reviewers seems to let technical issues like the ones in LO and TLR significantly bog down review scores whereas Japanese reviewers are willing to live through those same issues and not let it ruin their own enjoyment of the game.  On the other hand, Mass Effect's technical issues were arguably worse than either of LO or TLR yet it was the best reviewed of the three.

No one is saying that all of those JRPGs deserve 90+ averages.  I even think that some JRPG fans are overratting LO.  It is still a good game but not THAT good.  I would give LO either an 8 or 8.5.  mrstickball just feels that Western reviewers are giving JRPGs to much unfair criticism.

To be perfectly honest...no not really. When I look at features and quality and technicality, Western RPGs have the upper hand. Like, when comparing Lost Odyssey to Oblivion. Oblivion has a different battle system, but in overall depth and possibilities it wins out hands down.

That said, I think Western reviewers shouldn't be so pissy about the flaws they point out in JRPGs, and that JRPGs are better for obviously different reasons. Vesperia has too many skit scenes that take away from the graphics? What the honest f***, IGN? Don't you even know they are OPTIONAL?

Review scores don't mean anything, blah blah blah, you know my spiel.

But no, generally speaking Western RPGs this generation are just better. It was true last generation, too, people just didn't like to talk about it as much.

I don't know guys, I'm neither a JRPG fan, nor a hater. But let's be honest.
Let's take LO as an example. Is it considered a top notch JRPG? From what I've heard and read, yes. Most likely.
And Mass Effect is considered to be a top WRPG. Well, I tried LO.
I'll be straight here. Despite its really good features, and despite features that have to do with tastes (tb battle system etc), it has SO many flaws that are almost laughable. Technical issues, dialogues without end and without meaning and a story that... er... isn't exactly a narrative masterpiece, though it is considered to be from the fans of the genre. But it isn't.
What I personally see here (in the narrative and story evolving part) is that a whole generation of gamers, grown up with JRPGs and FF like narration and story building, have serious issues of separating a really good story from a piece of junk.
I bet the VAST majority of these gamers haven't read a single literary novel except those that are forced to in school
Don't get me wrong, it's just my point of view.
So, when this mediocrity gets repetitive, even the older fans of the genre get bored from it. Look at the FFXI and FFXII reviews. I don't recall a single positive sentence in major reviews (excluding the FF praise thing which was expected)
Not a single phrase for some new and refreshing features, of something new and audacious.
Once again, I'm not a fan of the genre, so, I might be wrong here. Just my thoughts...

Compared to what? I think, of those 25 JRPGs I listed (I have a list of about 50 from this generation ranging from 56% to 88%) many of them deserved higher scores - especially the bulk of those in the 70-80%.

I don't know if any JRPGs thus far should of earned a solid 90% average. But from the ones I've played - Tales of Vesperia comes very well close to what would be a very solid, polished, great experience of an RPG. Reviewers agreed that it was the best of the series, and a very good game. Yet slashed points so severely, it doesn't even match up with half of the Tales series!

For example, the following PS2 RPGs are higher rated than ANY next-gen console RPG:

• Final Fantasy X, X-2, XI, XII
• Kingdom Hearts I, II
• DQVIII
• Dark Cloud 2
• Persona 3, FES
• Shadow Hearts: Covenant
• Suikoden III

And the cutoff is there due to VC - take VC out, and there's another 5-8 RPGs before ToV shows up on the list. And that's 1 system.