I do think that JRPGs of the last generations are so far better than current-gen JRPGs. The JRPG fall started last-gen, ps2 RPGs didn´t reach the quality and diversity of SNES and PS RPGs. And I think that´s due to Squaresoft going bankrupt and merging with Enix, which led to lack of competition and fear of making new original IPs.
Considering the handheld RPGs so far, there´s really one that deserved 90+ rating and that´s TWEWY. The rest are remakes and enhanced ports of older games and honestly would it be right to rate these a 90+? Another game that I personally believe deserves a 90+ rating is Crisis Core, but this is really a tricky game. It´s a prequel to FFVII and is deeply attached to its protagonist. It´s not a typical RPG, it rather tells the story of Zack Fair in an already predetermined way and focus on revealing infos on Shinra, Jenova Project, etc... Judgement of it is really tricky because one FFVII demographic will praise the game for what it does and its quality and another won´t because it´s not a typical FFVII and/or retcons some stuff. Non-FFVII demographic is again separated in two, those that are happy with a different take on RPGs and those that were expecting a RPG with world map and such. Lastly, Jeanne D´Arc, cutscenes aside, didn´t impress me. FFT is far better.
Considering console JRPGs, I´ll start with LO. It has a great world, great characters, great character emotions and good cutscenes (one cutscene with Kakanas is really funny!). So far so good. The story is enthralling up to the end of disc 2 and the memories are a superb piece of literature. After that it really starts to deter and become typical of an average JRPG, I was expecting much more to be going on. The villain in the end is typical of that of old Sakaguchi RPGs in power , but he doesn´t reach the epicness of Kefka, Sephiroth. The gameplay is solid and deep, good strategy is required in some parts and most bosses. At some points I found it really easy though. It is tried out formula that works really well here, but random encounters, exploration/battle field transition and easy difficulty in some parts should have been avoided. Now the technical stuff, the game is suffering from loading times, weird face character textures and framerate drop. Also the main characters, villain and other important characters are well-made and have lot of detail, yet the rest like citizens are really weak and the same face models are being used like hell. So I don´t think LO would deserve a 90+ rating. If it had the same story quality in the second part, eventually a better villain, was more polished, more seamless and had fewer loading screens it would have been top-quality.
I think TLR suffers from the same technical stuff yet much worse. It is indeed an overambitious RPG that if SE let its dev team polish for 6 months it would have been an instant classic. IU, well, this one is just a bad RPG. Tales of are the same since the gamecube. They haven´t practically changed at all and they have the same pros/cons as always. For me they´ve always been 80+ games and it should be the case for ToV and ToS2(if it doesn´t stray from the winning formula). SO 1&2 have surpassed Tales for me in every single field and I think if SO4 sticks to what made these 2 successful and offers roaming to different planets it will be a 90+~95+ game. Haven´t played VC because I don´t own a PS3 but from what I´ve seen this game should have been higher, at least very near to 90 or a bit higher. I haven´t played BD as well, but that´s because I was really turned off by the demo and I really don´t consider it to be good.
There is one current JRPGs that would deserve a 90+ rating, yet not on current-gen consoles. And this is P3 . But it´s understandable that it´s stuck between 85 and 90, because its graphically not marvelous since Atlus doesn´t have cash to make games with AAA production values.
As far WRPGs go, I think the Elder Scrolls series is overrated and Oblivion shouldn´t be over 90+. I´ve played both Morrowind and Oblivion a bit and really didn´t like them. On the other hand Fallout 3 deserves a 90+ rating, it´s based on a splendid and even a different developer that has cash can still make a very good game. It still isn´t Fallout 1&2 quality of course. I haven´t played ME to judge and I´ve heard the game has bugs and technical issues maybe this one is proof that reviewers are highly biased towards WRPGs. On top of that if the main quest takes places in one place only, is only 10 hours long and the sidequests are bad then I highly doubt how such a RPG deserves a 90+ rating. Kotor barely made 90+ rating and it seems it´so much better than ME. I think the Witcher rating reflects its quality, very good but nothing more. It can´t reach the quality of last year RPG of the year Persona 3, even it has much better graphics. This at least is reflected through the ratings. I´ve played Fable 2 and I think its rating is a bit too high, it should have rather been a bit below 85. The combat is easy, slow for an action RPG, the usage of spells is awkward since you can´t easily switch between various spells. It has some neat features like the gestures and interactions with NPCs, but this gets boring. I really like how you can use both melee and long range weapons, I really like when RPGs do that (see Rogue Galaxy). Marrying, buying a house and taking care of your family are cool, but nothing impressive actually, rather tedious in the end. I found the the weapon smithing cool and addictive. The most entertaining thing for me was dressing up my character with clothes I wanted.
