Xenogears' story isn't deep, a convulted and complex story can't be deep, since a story really can't be both deep and complex, since a complex story happens in the game, but a deep story happens in your mind, it makes you think about things.
However, a complex story always keeps you guessing - what is this about, what about that, what will I find after this dungeon, and thus it is a great way to have someone go through a game.
And the reason for all of the things you say aren't because it is "cliche" but because of budget problems because the creation of FF8 was too money-consuming that a large part of Xenogears' budget was given to .

Anyway, to each his own, I don't really remember how we got into this argument, you like stories plain and simple, I like them complex and intriguing.

And still no one disputed my points about the fact that the reason DQ and FF got big in Japan is due to their gameplay.

If there's nothing special about the gameplay, why would people buy those games because of the gameplay? 

Multiplayer has nothing to do with gameplay, it's just a feature and "highly polished and refined" doesn't really explain nothing about what this gameplay is.

Mario had a lot of unique ideas for a 2D platformer, so yes, there are a lot of special things in Mario.

And look at the sales of story focused games in Japan.

Yes, but what makes the gameplay in DQ/FF/Pokémon (the first games) so good?

"since a story really can't be both deep and complex"

I strongly disagree. A deep story can also be a complex story. Final Fantasy VI has a deep and complex storyline, Final Fantasy VII too. Complex and deep are 2 words that can coexist in a single game. 

Also, deepness has nothing to do with simplicity.

Because they were the first of their kind with the same gameplay, and than as time progressed the gameplay got more and more refined, the decline with FF sales is, in my opinion, because a lot of pepole just got fed up with the gameplay.

Tell this to Wii Sports, MW2 and NSMBW lol! Having multiplayer (local one) enhances the gaming experience.

After the first Mario, it didn't keep selling because of innovation, but because of refinement of gameplay.

And there is nothing deep about FF6 and 7's plot, not deeper than Xenogears lol.

Let's talk about gameplay and not "gaming experience". 

Mario is still selling because it has a lot of fans since Mario Bros. (nes) and not exactly because of gameplay. 

If it was because of the gameplay, explain to me why Mother, Ultima: Exodus, Hydlide and Crystalis didn't sold better. I don't understand your focus on gameplay in every game mentioned (you even compared multiplayer to gameplay lol). For me it's easy to understand that FF and DQ were the best options on the NES and that's why they sold better.

You use DQ and FF to show that japanese players doesn't like a good storyline but I think it's a big mistake. You are ignoring a lot of things and one of them is that storyline wasn't an issue in that time! You are ignoring a lot of things and one of them is that storyline wasn't an issue in that time! Everything was simple like kill monsters, make your character stronger etc etc. That's the real fun.

Ask Diablo fans if they were unhappy with the poor storyline.

1. Cool

2. And these fans are Mario fans because of the gameplay, next?

3. DQ1 was released in 1986, FF1 was released in 1987, Crystalis and Mother were released after 1988, by that time FF and DQ have probably already got the main marketshare of pepole who like that type of games.
About Hydlide? Dunno, maybe the game just wasn't good enough on the gameplay aspect.

4. Nope, you missed my entire point lol (which have me question why do I even bother replying to you lol), I use "them" (since I don't use the entire series but the first three games of each) to prove that such games sold a LOT without having any semblence of a storyline.

5. They'll say that they don't care since they are playing for the gameplay. ZING!

2. How do you know? Even atari games had the same platform gameplay. Which proves that your point is wrong.

3. If the gameplay is similar, why wouldn't players want to play the other games too?

4. Bad argument, I was talking about the first games too (1, 2 and 3) and telling you that storyline WASN'T an issue that time. All they wanted was play RPG, also, if you make some research you will know that RPGs usually didn't had a great storyline in that time, it was just about killing monsters, make your character more strong, buy items etc. This is the main point of an old RPG and if you deny it, that's because you are new on this business.

5. Funny how I never heard anyone talking about the gameplay in Diablo, and that's because I am a Diablo fan...

2. Do you have proof or argument to show that Mario has fans because of the gameplay? I am a Mario fan since I played Mario Bros. and that's not because of the gameplay.

3. More well-known games? Do you have proof to show that FF1 and DQ1 were more well-known than Mother in that time? 

4.That's exactly your point? When did I talked about the gameplay? I don't see your logic, RPG NEVER was about the gameplay before, it was about killing monsters and make your character stronger. I don't think you know what RPG is, this genre didn't started on videogames my friend. Don't put words in my mouth just because you don't have arguments.

All they wanted was play RPG = All they wanted was kill monsters and make their character stronger.

5. That's a lie, Diablo is about the difficulty, quests, kill monsters, make your character stronger etc etc, not about gameplay. Do you know what a dungeon crawler is?

Also, I think you are a bit stressed and that's bad for your age. Don't take it too seriously, it's not a fight and you won't lose anything.

Do you know what gameplay even means?

And I am not stressed, actually you're helping me spend time at work :P

2. I became a Mario fan because of the soundtrack, the idea of save the princess, the way that the world works (design) and the bosses. Yes I like the gameplay but it's NOT the main factor for me, I wouldn't play Mario Bros. just because of the gameplay, there is much more in this game for me.

3. Show me

4. Gameplay has nothing to do with kill monsters and become strong.

5. Gameplay = the way you play the game, nothing else.

I just think you are wrong because you are using gameplay to explain everything and you even said that Pokémon sells because of the gameplay just because it doesn't have a storyline. Pokémon has a looot of good points that can make it sell: Catching/collecting monsters, collecting badges, explore the world etc (and it has nothing to do with gameplay).

You also mentioned Monster Hunter but the gameplay isn't perfect, actually it's really bad for some people because it can be very slow. Some people just play it because they wan't to kill dinossaurs and become a hunter (another point that you ignored).

You are using Final Fantasy and DQ to explain that japanese players don't like storyline but I think it's a mistake too because storyline never was an issue in that time and you know that (I guess), so we can't condemn the japanese players using an old RPG, what about use a current game?

Another problem is that you seems to use YOUR tastes, for example: If the game doesn't have a storyline, only the gameplay can make someone play it. This idea makes you generalize everything, it's not really an argument, it's just your opinion. The concept of the game (kill monsters, become stronger, become a hunter, collecting monsters etc) can attract much more than the gameplay (sometimes)