Slashdot Mirror


RPGs - East Versus West?

Thanks to GameSpy for their Spy/Counterspy column discussing the relative advantages and disadvantages of Western and Japanese RPGs. According to GameSpy editor Benjamin Turner's less-enthusiastic view of Japanese RPGs: "I want to create my own characters instead of playing someone else's; I want to explore a world at my own pace rather than being shuffled through a pre-planned, linear progression. Most of all, I want to be able to replay a favorite game and have a very different experience." However, editor Christian Nutt's rebuttal suggests: "While there are entertaining elements to Western RPGs... the way that all of the design elements of a great Japanese RPG work in concert to offer a truly engaging experience as a whole is what really excites me the most."

93 comments

  1. Ultima 7 has yet to be surpassed... by andrewski · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In terms of sheer depth, scope, variety, and detail U7 is still king in my mind. The ability to do almost anything silly makes me so happy.

    1. Re:Ultima 7 has yet to be surpassed... by WWWWolf · · Score: 1

      Yeah, Ultima 7 is wonderful. I used to just merely like the game until I actually started playing it seriously, at which point I realized it really, absolutely, totally rules. Not only has the Ultima series generally had extremely original plots, but U7 is particularly nice in this respect.

      Since I've played next to no JRPGs (Some bits of FF7, a hugish chunk of Breath of Fire), I've yet to see a JRPG that has the option of Baking Bread. Bet it's there somewhere, but it sure is in U7 =)

      And while JRPGs generally have Quite Epic Weapons, none will, or ever has, the equivalent of the Hoe of Destruction. =)

      Shame the U7BG game font is nearly unreadable. Glad we have Exult now - the first thing I'll do when I get back from vacation is a shapes patch that gives it an actually readable screen text =)

    2. Re:Ultima 7 has yet to be surpassed... by andrewski · · Score: 0

      I know. I enjoy U7 on my Macintosh. Exult is a beautiful thing indeed.

    3. Re:Ultima 7 has yet to be surpassed... by mink · · Score: 1

      "I've yet to see a JRPG that has the option of Baking Bread."

      Try Star Ocean II or Legaia II: Dual Saga for bread making. I am sure there are a few other games that have cooking in them, but i cant think of any off the top og my head. Maybe one of the Harvest Moon games.

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
  2. Not East vs. West, but Prolific vs. Sporadic by Txiasaeia · · Score: 2, Insightful
    It's really, really, REALLY hard to fault Japanese RPGs -- if you don't like one, there's about fifty million others to try. Xenosaga, .hack, the FF series, Chrono series, etc. etc. There's tonnes of good ones out there, with varying themes and settings.

    As for western RPGs... well, we're kinda limited in our choices. Want to play in a fantasy setting? Great! Pick from five (in the last couple of years). Steampunk? One choice. Sci-fi? Sorry, out of luck.

    --
    Condemnant quod non intellegunt.
    1. Re:Not East vs. West, but Prolific vs. Sporadic by illuvata · · Score: 2, Insightful

      yea but while there are loads of JRPGs out there, there sort of the same. i mean, i when i play the newest FF, i usually know at least 80% of the plot in advance, and its not the type of game i want to play twice.
      actually, with the newest FF, i thought it was more of an interactive movie, with the game parts being anoying sequences you had to play to get on with the story

    2. Re:Not East vs. West, but Prolific vs. Sporadic by Mike+Hawk · · Score: 1

      KOTOR for sci-fi, one needs no other. GG fanboy. Regardless of theme and setting, all JRPGs are the same. Can I have at least one choice in my path please? Please?

    3. Re:Not East vs. West, but Prolific vs. Sporadic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Real life is deterministic, who says games shouldn't be?

    4. Re:Not East vs. West, but Prolific vs. Sporadic by Tuxinatorium · · Score: 1

      yeah, like in metal gear solit they threw in the one torture sequence and all it does is give you a choice of one ending or the other, the whole rest of the game is the same. You cant formulate your own strategy, you just linearly do as you're told.

    5. Re:Not East vs. West, but Prolific vs. Sporadic by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1

      It's the difference between *hearing* a story, and *telling* a story.

      With Japanese style RPGs, you're often listening to a story being told; no matter what you do, the basic story is always the same. Sub-plots and side-quests give it some variety, but when you get right down to it, you're watching a play.

      Western style RPGs try to have you *telling* the story; you choose, with varying degrees of freedom, how the story will turn out. You're not watching a play, you're writing one.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  3. blah by Clockwurk · · Score: 1, Informative

    Sci-fi? Sorry, out of luck

    Fallout 1 and 2 ??

    1. Re:blah by Methuseus · · Score: 1

      He was talking contemporary, otherwise your point is valid.

      --
      Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, though I'm not yet sure about the universe. - A Einstein
    2. Re:blah by Rayonic · · Score: 2, Informative

      Deus Ex, arguably.

      Freelancer definately.

      Anachronox too.

      Anarchy Online technically fits the bill.

      System Shock 2, Fallout Tactics, Neocron, Wasteland, Earth and Beyond.

      Heck, I'd say there are at least as many sci-fi Western RPGs as there are Eastern ones.

    3. Re:blah by Txiasaeia · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Deus Ex is a FPS with very, very strong RPG elements. I'd call it a RPG/FPS hybrid.

      Freelancer is not an RPG, any more than Privateer was. It's a great game, but it's closer to an action game than an RPG.

      Anachronox was great, but it's how old now? Besides, it was greatly (and obviously) influenced by JRPGs, as was Septerra Core, so much that I'd call them Eastern RPGs developed in the West.

      Anarchy Online is an MMORPG; strictly speaking, not a CRPG. (This gets fuzzy, but one could argue that MMO games are in a genre by themself -- I'm not sure that the tactics used in an MMO qualifies as "role playing.")

      System Shock 2: FPS with RPG elements.

      Fallout Tactics: Tactical strategy set in post-apocalyptic setting, some RPG elements.

      Neocron, Earth & Beyond, not sure... aren't these MMORPGS?

      And Wasteland.. well, yes, there is Wasteland.

      Fallout 1 and 2 were absolutely fantastic, but I've played them *how* many times since they were released?

      You have to admit that this is a pretty short list, and most of these games aren't true CRPGs. The Fallout games are, Anachronox comes close, Deus Ex is fuzzy in the background, but the rest are lumped amongst action or MMO games.

      All I'm saying is, what's going on here? Paradise Cracked is coming out soon, and again it's a tactical strategy game with RPG elements, but at least it's sci-fi, and Restricted Area (which might actually be, *gasp*, a sci-fi RPG!) is still quite a ways off from seeing the light of day.

      --
      Condemnant quod non intellegunt.
    4. Re:blah by Kirsha · · Score: 1

      That is what he was reffering to as steampunk.

    5. Re:blah by Rayonic · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, I don't want to get into an argument about the definition of "RPG", because nobody ever reaches a consensus on it. I was just grokking a list of sci-fi games that could be loosely-defined as an RPG, and not limiting myself to the classic definition of CRPG.

      Also, does changing the perspective and battle system of an RPG suddenly mean it's not an RPG anymore? If Deus Ex is not really an RPG, then neither is Ultima Underworld. Yes, there is some action, but JRPGs mix in action all the time -- Star Ocean, Tales of Destiny, Secret of Mana, etc.

      I haven't played Freelancer, but I have heard it is like an RPG. "Diablo in space" is actually what I heard. Yes, I am aware of Diablo's questionable status.

      MMORPGs are, arguably, more RPG-like than any of your Fallouts or Final Fantasies. In an MMORPG you can gain an actual reputation among actual people. MMORPGs (and the MUDs that preceeded them) are much closer to the genre's pen-and-paper roots.

      There are some I left out, also. There are lots of games that mix sci-fi and fantasy, like the Might and Magic series, and the early Ultimas.

      I believe we also forgot to mention a little Western RPG called "Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic."

    6. Re:blah by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1
      Could be that is what going on is that these games are far greater in complexity then their japanese counterparts? Fallout had a shit load of different endings, and it takes a lot of work to make sure it all balances out in the end. (no super weapons available to soon, no critical characters killed off, not getting trapped into super though missions to early).

      Compare that to the far more on rails gameplay of the FF series. Do they even have multiple endings? (sorry but I never finished one as I got bored)

      For me some of the FF type games are not true RPG games. Just powering up does not make an RPG you need to develop a character through youre actions and decisions. Not just learn more attacks by fighting battles.

      --

      MMO Quests are like orgasms:

      You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    7. Re:blah by mink · · Score: 1

      A number of FF games had differing endings, not sure that all of them do.
      Some key events in the games for example determine the endings.

      Chrono Trigger is the most obvious Squaresoft game that you can see different endings based on a bajillion things inthe game.

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
  4. This is journalism? by Rayonic · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The first guy had extensive experience with both JRPG and CRPG games. He stated his positive and negative experiences with JRPGs, then explained why he later learned to love CRPGs more.

    The second guy admitted that he had no experience with CRPGs: "I'll admit that my experience with Western RPGs is comparatively limited." What the hell? Then he launches into a mushy rant where he describes the strong points of some JRPGs he has played, and hardly even mentions how CRPGs compare in those areas. Well, I guess he can't, since he hasn't played any. (He seems to admit that he fooled around with KOTOR a bit, or maybe just watched it.)

    The very idea that a "Western" RPG can't have an engaging storyline is complete bollocks. Certainly Morrowind doesn't have the most engaging plot, but what about Planescape Torment or Fallout?

    Maybe some people just can't get immersed in a good storyline if they have to make decisions in it (i.e. Role-Play). That indicates a certain lack of imagination, IMHO.

    1. Re:This is journalism? by illuvata · · Score: 1

      The very idea that a "Western" RPG can't have an engaging storyline is complete bollocks. Certainly Morrowind doesn't have the most engaging plot, but what about Planescape Torment or Fallout?

      i wouldn't say Morrowinds story is bad, its just that it isn't forced on you. if you really want to understand the world it plays in, you'll have to read lots of (in game) books and talk to otherwise useless people. if you just do the main quest and a guild or two, or think the only use for books is to increase your skills, you'll probalby miss alot
      i agree that Planescapes story is better though

  5. I cannot STAND western RPG's. by silentbobdp · · Score: 0, Troll

    Western RPGs, IMO, allow too much freedom. If you're not careful, you accidentally create the kind of character you are, or go down a story thread you didn't care about at all, and you aren't really engaged by your own character. Furthermore, I hate every WRPG's battle system. Ever. I don't know why, I just cannot stand it at ALL. I can't play a WRPG.

    Give me Chrono Trigger over Ultima any day.

    --
    --Moo.
    1. Re:I cannot STAND western RPG's. by Mike+Hawk · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah, choosing a ROLE to PLAY in a GAME sucks. Who wants to PLAY a ROLE in a GAME when the developer can choose for you. I'd rather watch a movie about myself too.

    2. Re:I cannot STAND western RPG's. by CashCarSTAR · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually I agree with you on the battle systems.

      I have yet to play a WRPG that has a half-decent battle system. They all seem to spawn from the D&D ruleset, which, to be honest is boring.

      Nothing gives you the options of a good JRPG I find.

    3. Re:I cannot STAND western RPG's. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      why, can't handle more than one thing at a time?

    4. Re:I cannot STAND western RPG's. by CashCarSTAR · · Score: 1

      Actually, it is because I like to handle more than one thing at a time that I tend to not like the WRPG battle systems. They tend to be so plain and vanilla.

      Too much hack n' slash, not enough options.

      JRPGs tend to go overboard in the option department, at least the newer ones. Brings tweaking to a high level.

    5. Re:I cannot STAND western RPG's. by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      I've found that western RPGs tend to have more of a high-level strategy element, but a lot less glitz in the battle environment.

    6. Re:I cannot STAND western RPG's. by Daetrin · · Score: 1
      Yeah, choosing a ROLE to PLAY in a GAME sucks. Who wants to PLAY a ROLE in a GAME when the developer can choose for you. I'd rather watch a movie about myself too.

      The actors who PLAY ROLEs in movies or plays, don't get much choice about how their character acts, or rather, they don't get to choose the major events, the just have some influence over delivery of lines. So it's still a ROLE you're PLAYing in the GAME, even if you didn't choose the ROLE yourself.

      Even the western CRPGs i've played don't give you much freedom of choice when compared to a pen and paper RPG. It's nice when they include the ability to influence outcomes, which a lot of JRPGs do (FF5 and FF6 are only the first that pop to mind,) but i'd rather have a good storyline with a linear plot then a less interesting story line with the pretense of free action.

      SO if you want a real ROLE to PLAY, i suggest you get together with some real people and play a real ROLE PLAYing GAME.

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    7. Re:I cannot STAND western RPG's. by robson · · Score: 1

      The actors who PLAY ROLEs in movies or plays, don't get much choice about how their character acts, or rather, they don't get to choose the major events, the just have some influence over delivery of lines. So it's still a ROLE you're PLAYing in the GAME, even if you didn't choose the ROLE yourself.

      And that's precisely the difference between a static narrative (movie or play) and an interactive narrative (a "game"). When I play a rold-playing game, I want to play someone I'm not, but that doesn't mean I want my decisions made for me. There's a tremendous difference there.

      As far as I'm concerned, games should be striving for fully interactive plotlines.

    8. Re:I cannot STAND western RPG's. by Daetrin · · Score: 1
      And that's precisely the difference between a static narrative (movie or play) and an interactive narrative (a "game"). When I play a rold-playing game, I want to play someone I'm not, but that doesn't mean I want my decisions made for me. There's a tremendous difference there.

      You're putting the cart before the horse. A movie or play is not defined as a static narative. There have been a lot of plays with audience participation that can control the outcome, and a few movies as well. True, those mediums are better suited towards a static narrative, but that's not what they _are_.

      Likewise, a game is well suited for an interactive narrative, but by the criticisms you make most games _aren't_. Even the crappy RPGs have more interaction than the average fighter or racer or what have you. And as stated before, even the best of them don't hold a candle to real role playing. Being told "Hi, I need your help" and being given the choices of "A: Be Good, B: Be Neutral, C: Be Evil," isn't really the pinacle of roleplaying.

      Not that having those options is bad, but if that's the best thay're able to do with current technology, it seems silly to critisize some games for focussing on telling a good story rather than spending development time to give you a very limited set of options to influence the outcome of things.

      As far as I'm concerned, games should be striving for fully interactive plotlines.

      Well fortunatly for the rest of us, you're not the one making decisions. I'm quite happy with what is effectively an interactive novel. If some companies want to work on "fully interactive plotlines," (which means what exactly?) that's fine, but not _all_ games should be striving for that.

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    9. Re:I cannot STAND western RPG's. by robson · · Score: 1

      Hehe... how can you and I disagree so completely on games yet agree so completely on Howard Dean? 8D

      (BTW, perhaps unfortunately for some, my profession is game design, so I am in some sense "the one making decisions". Although I don't see games getting as plotline-interactive as *I* would like for a long time, for a host of reasons.)

    10. Re:I cannot STAND western RPG's. by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1
      Being told "Hi, I need your help" and being given the choices of "A: Be Good, B: Be Neutral, C: Be Evil," isn't really the pinacle of roleplaying.

      Ah, KOTOR. I love the game, but I'm noticing, having beat it as a fully Light Jedi, and now playing it as a Dark, that picking c) evil simply has Carth chiding you, then going back to the central dialog, where as picking a) good has Carth congradulate you, then go back to the central dialog.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    11. Re:I cannot STAND western RPG's. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The game is infinitely better if you just don't talk to Carth, ever. Same goes for Mission too (what dumbass named a character in a game Mission? thats gotta be a rule somewhere in game design 101 . . .)

      Other than that, great game.

    12. Re:I cannot STAND western RPG's. by Daetrin · · Score: 1
      (BTW, perhaps unfortunately for some, my profession is game design, so I am in some sense "the one making decisions". Although I don't see games getting as plotline-interactive as *I* would like for a long time, for a host of reasons.)

      Perhaps fortunatly for some, or unfortunatly for you, or something, my profession is game programming, so i'll just tell you that what you're asking for is impossible and propose a more "reasonable" solution ;)

      Besides, regardless of what any one designer or programmer desires, the entire game industry does not hinge on their position. There will continue to be semi-linear RPGs for quite some time, probably for as long as i and others like me continue to be interested in elaborate storylines.

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    13. Re:I cannot STAND western RPG's. by robson · · Score: 1

      Perhaps fortunatly for some, or unfortunatly for you, or something, my profession is game programming, so i'll just tell you that what you're asking for is impossible and propose a more "reasonable" solution ;)

      Besides, regardless of what any one designer or programmer desires, the entire game industry does not hinge on their position. There will continue to be semi-linear RPGs for quite some time, probably for as long as i and others like me continue to be interested in elaborate storylines.


      If at all possible, I'd like to move the conversation away from the adversarial and toward the theoretical here.

      Of course it's impossible to achieve a completely dynamic plot in a CRPG; however, there's a rich gradient between the poles of static and dynamic plotlines. Just within this /. topic, we're seeing people arguing the merits of games which fall all over the place within that gradient.

      Framing your position as being "interested in elaborate storylines" is a little misleading, because I think gamers on both sides of this debate want elaborate storylines. The difference is the desired level of interactivity. And to suggest that a storyline's quality declines as interactivity rises, well... I can't agree. I think there are ways to approach this problem which haven't been explored yet. Ion Austin and Rockstar North are definitely heading in the right direction.

      And if nothing else, we can rest assured that as long as there are a "West" and an "East" making games, we'll all get what we're looking for from the market :)

    14. Re:I cannot STAND western RPG's. by Daetrin · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Of course it's impossible to achieve a completely dynamic plot in a CRPG; however, there's a rich gradient between the poles of static and dynamic plotlines. Just within this /. topic, we're seeing people arguing the merits of games which fall all over the place within that gradient.

      I don't have a problem with more interactive games being developed, as long as there are still "normal" CRPGs around. In effect, i'll agree with your original statement if by "games should be striving for fully interactive plotlines" you mean some games, and by some games, you mean some RPGs.

      Framing your position as being "interested in elaborate storylines" is a little misleading, because I think gamers on both sides of this debate want elaborate storylines. The difference is the desired level of interactivity. And to suggest that a storyline's quality declines as interactivity rises, well... I can't agree. I think there are ways to approach this problem which haven't been explored yet. Ion Austin and Rockstar North are definitely heading in the right direction.

      I wouldn't really consider it misleading because i see the detail of the storyline and the amound of interactivity with the storyline as being almost diametrically opposed.

      Without the presence of a human GM to decide what effect the actions of the player have, the developers have three options that i can see, they can limit the actions the player can take, they can limit the detail of the plot so that the player's actions can be incorporated into it, or they can allow nonsensical behavior to occur.

      This problem is further compounded of course because the developer has to make these decisions in advance, and predict what important decisions the player will want to make and choose to allow for them or not, and if allowed, spend time detailing what happens as a results of those actions.

      To take a stereotypical example, the king summons the player's party to his castle and tells them a great evil is upon the land, yadda yadda. The players decide the king is a bore, and attack him and kill him. If that's allowed, the developer then has to have a whole plot set out around the player being evil and what happens in that case. Since the divergence happend right at the begining, in effect two entire plots have to be constructed in the same amount of time as was original allocated for one plot, and thus we'd expect each plot to have about half the detail that the original would have had.

      That's obviously an exagerated case, but i believe that the same is true in microcosm. The more possibilities the designers have to consider the less detailed the resulting plot will be, due to both time and resource constraints, and due to preventing conflicts from appearing if the player makes certain choices.

      We've already seen this issue rear it's head in a limited form with the transition from catridge based games to cd-based games, and the coinciding inclusion of pre-rendered cutscenes. For example, Final Fantasy 5, FF6, and Chrono Trigger all had ways in which the ending of the game could be altered. FF 7 and 8 and Xenogears did not. Since i wasn't on the development team i can't say for sure why that was the case, but i can make a pretty good guess.

      Chrono Trigger had more than 12 endings (exact number depends on how you count) which the later games to do similarly would have required 12 different cutscenes, something that would have been prohibitively expensive both in money/rendering time and in disk space. (I believe that for the PSX remake they left all the endings in rather than face a fan-revolt, but only two got the pre-rendered cutscene treatment.)

      FF5 and 6 varied the ending based on which characters were killed in the final battle, or which characters were never rescued respectively. This was acomplished both by playing alternate scenes in some areas, and by swaping out which chracter sprites were playing in others (a little of this was done in Chrono Trigger as well, especially as r

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    15. Re:I cannot STAND western RPG's. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hack and slash are in games like diablo, in games like baulders gate and such, you got 6 of your people moving around at the same time, unlike jrpgs which are usually turn based, and that doesn't include all the monsters you're fighting at the same time, and you don't just hack and slash in those games, especially towards then end when you fight incredibly hard monsters which require a lot of prefighting strategy and spell casting.

    16. Re:I cannot STAND western RPG's. by mink · · Score: 1

      You end up pausing it enough it might as well be turn based.

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
  6. RPGs that combine elements of both JRPG & USRP by narratorDan · · Score: 1

    I have noticed that contrast between RPGs, and I was wondering if there were any that had a set story line and set characters that also allowed one to make your own character and diverge from the set story line. In much the same way that non-computer RPGs (e.g. AD&D, White Wolf, GURPS, etc") do with pen and paper. I know that there are tons of automatic character generation scripts (and programs) out there and tons of map generators but I've never seen an actual RPG that fulfills both.
    I could imagine this as a nice change in computer RPGs, a pre-generated character and story line to introduce you to the game and it's mechanics and politics, then later you can play a brand new character to explore the parts that you had to skip over while you were learning.

    NarratorDan

    --
    "If you're not confused by quantum mechanics, you really don't understand it." - Niels Bohr
  7. Interactive movies by nsideops · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As someone else said, to many rpgs are nothing more than interactive movies to me, and most seem to have very little on the interactive side. I've always been one of those few final fantasy haters and with each release my hate for them just seemed to get worse. 20mins of movie, 5mins of game play. This does not appeal to me at all. To many action games are taking this idea way to far as well (Metal Gear Solid 2), but thats another story. When I play a game, I want to play a game, not watch a movie. Now don't get me wrong, I have no problem with well placed video sequences to progress the story or even for cool "WOW, LOOK AT THAT" scense, but when the majority of the game revolves around this, I just can't handle it. I guess the first rpg that really got me interested was Morrowind. The sheer freedom was amazing. Right now I'm addicted to Knights of the Old Republic. Great game, and even though there is quite a bit of video, it's short, revolves directly around the choices you have made and don't seem to try to take over the game. The final fantasy series and similar games just seem to be pretty video first, every thing else last, at least in for me. Release it as a movie and I'll watch, but surounded in short, random game elements, I'm not interested.

    --
    Teach someone to use the net and they won't bother you for weeks; show them Slashdot and you may never see them again.
    1. Re:Interactive movies by lidocaineus · · Score: 1

      Did you even read the article? do you realize you just repeated a version of the difference between C and J RPGs? I mean you just compared two completely opposing styles - FF and KOTR.

    2. Re:Interactive movies by evilhayama · · Score: 1

      Yeah, they should make a movie from Final Fantasy! That would be great... Or mediocre and overhyped.

      Actually the creators of Xenogears/Xenosaga have announced they're going to make a Xenosaga anime, and fans have already cut together Xenosaga episode 1 into a 13 episode anime-like series. Check that out if you want to get the story without the game.

    3. Re:Interactive movies by mink · · Score: 1

      The FMV "problem" really isnt a FF specific problem, square jsut makes with the pretty.
      FF1-6 never had a lick of FMV, and only a few small non user controlled cutscenes.
      FF7 gave us some pretty cutscenes that IMO were well used to creat an atmosphere or tell a part of the story that the ingame engine couldnt do justic to (a few years later we have square amking a game with no FMV and all ingame cutscenes).
      With FF8 we had a little bit more FMV, and the same escalation happened with 9.
      IMO in 9 the non cutscene stuff still completely dwarfes any cutscenes, and they still only filled in the impostant events.
      FFX I think is the culpret for this complaint about all FF games being movies with more cutscene then gameplay.
      Metal Gear Solid 2 also caused this backlash.

      I think FMV can have a place but they need to beware of overuse.

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
  8. KOTOR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    First of all, I'll come out and say im a Japanese RPG fan, so you know where I'm coming from.

    Im just playing through Star Wars: KOTOR for the second time... The first time through I was the perfect hero in every situation, and the story arc basically followed a Japanese RPG. Your character is selfless, etc, etc. With the Evil character though, I was really dissapointed. You have freedom, but it was very very limited. You become the most evil and powerful sith in the galaxy, and people will still refer to you as a member of the republic, etc. There are lots of faults with consistency and what "makes sense." Fallout did a much better job with this, I think. Western game's freedom is just another variable that can be pulled off very well or not so well. Once games get ambitious enough to really let you do anything (*crossing fingers for Fable*) I think Eastern RPG fans will be more pleased. Personally, I would rather have a completely linear story than something that is only partially open ended. You have to ask yourself, if you have freedom with THIS, why not freedom with THAT? If things get open ended enough though, and do so with a decent story line, that would be great.

    1. Re:KOTOR by nsideops · · Score: 1

      But you can't always base a game on what could be, you must base the game on what they actaully offer you. KOTOR does have a far more linear storyline than say Morrowind, but I see it as a linear storyline with a lot of leeway. Personally, I would rather have the freedoms to explore and experiment than be locked into a set path for the entire game like so many eastern rpgs limit you to. Sure, some eastern rpgs offer great stories but they have little to no freedom or differences to experience on repeated playings. Keep in mind, the freedom that is being displayed in current games is a fairly new thing and will only get better. Personally, I can't wait to see what is possible and, same as you, I have high expectations for Fable.

      --
      Teach someone to use the net and they won't bother you for weeks; show them Slashdot and you may never see them again.
    2. Re:KOTOR by Snowspinner · · Score: 1

      Pretty much no one refers to you as a member of the republic in KOTOR after you actually go sith with your allegiances. When you encounter Bastilla on the unknown planet, you can decisively "go evil", at which point no one will have much doubt who you're working for. Until that point, you're still ostensibly carrying out the mission of the Jedi council - even if you're privately already planning to betray them all.

  9. It's not even Point/Counterpoint by Nakanai_de · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The first guy had extensive experience with both JRPG and CRPG games. He stated his positive and negative experiences with JRPGs, then explained why he later learned to love CRPGs more.

    Well, yes, but one of his negative points WRT JRPGs was bad translation. Negative for FFVII: the translation was nearly sub-literate. Positive for Wizardry VII: wonderfully written text. The translation is hardly the fault of the game. In fact, a bad translation can completely ruin the main reason to play JRPGs- the storyline.

    That's just a sidenote, though. The main beef I have w/ this article is that it's not a point/counterpoint. The second person is supposed to take the arguments of the first and refute them. (For example, take the point about lack of character customization in JRPGs and trot out Final Fantasy Tactics as a counterexample. Or counter the claim of Most of all, I want to be able to replay a favorite game and have a very different experience. with the example of Seiken Densetsu 3.

    As it is, this article suffers from the main problem of point/counterpoint as it is written by amateurs, namely that the two sides talk right past each other so it's less like a debate and more like two, unconnected rants. I definitely think that the difference between Japanese and Western RPG design makes an interesting topic of discussion, but I imagine there will be more insightful comments here on /. (like this one, if you're reading, moderators :) ) than there were in this drivel.

    --

    Sono koro, bokura wa, sore ga sekai no shinjitsu da to shinjite ita.

    1. Re:It's not even Point/Counterpoint by Rayonic · · Score: 1

      That's just a sidenote, though. The main beef I have w/ this article is that it's not a point/counterpoint. The second person is supposed to take the arguments of the first and refute them. (For example, take the point about lack of character customization in JRPGs and trot out Final Fantasy Tactics as a counterexample. Or counter the claim of Most of all, I want to be able to replay a favorite game and have a very different experience. with the example of Seiken Densetsu 3.

      Just as a quick counterpoint, I think that extensive battle customization and the occasional branching path (like in those choose-your-own-adventure books) are quite different than the on-the-fly personality crafting of your typical CRPG.

  10. Two words by Quicksilver31337 · · Score: 1

    Chrono Trigger.

    --
    _______
    Death wish, n.:

    The only wish that always comes true, whether or not one wishes it t
  11. A hybrid of the 2 by saia · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Each of the 2 different styles of RPGs are great in their own way, but I have only seen one game I would consider a hybrid of the 2. That game would be Legend of Mana for PSOne.

    It's got the whole Japanese elements of the cutesy anime graphics and predeteremined plot lines.

    The Western elements are that you choose what your character uses and by using certain skills, they develop into other skills. You also determine how the world is rebuilt and what order you choose to do side quests. You can even tell the NPCs to screw off if you want and thus end a plot line. And if you do one set of events before another, they are no longer available.

    The replay value of this comes from discovering the various plot lines you miss the first time, and you will miss some.

    So each time you play, the world comes out a little different and your character comes out a little different but the overall plot is still followed.

    Any other hybrids between the 2 styles?

    1. Re:A hybrid of the 2 by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      Mmmff..I'd say that Legend of Mana leans seriously towards the Eastern side. It does have a few Western elements in it, but so did, say, FF5.

  12. Re:RPGs that combine elements of both JRPG & U by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    IMO fallout 2 gets closest to what you are looking for. You start out as "the chosen" of a dying tribe which wants you to find the eden creation kit, but after you're out of the camp, you can pretty much do anything you want to. There's only one ending, regardless of what you do while searching the kit, but it's still one of the most "free" CRPGs out there.

  13. Wizardry by Tsuzuki · · Score: 1

    Wizardry: Tale of the Forsaken Lands for the PS2 is one of the most interesting hybrids I've come across. It's a Western series but this particular game was done by a Japanese developer, covering a lot of the pros that the article mentioned on both sides. First person dungeon hack action, fully customisable characters and interesting quests/side-stories abound. The art is fairly incredible too, but lots of text descriptions of events keep the old-school feel.

    People tend to forget that Square are not the only Japanese RPG developer out there. Stuff by Tri-Ace (Tales of Destiny, Valkyrie Profile, Star Ocean 2), Natsume (Legend of the River King, Harvest Moon) and Atlus (Persona 2: Eternal Punishment) make for some of the most engrossing and fun games I have ever played.

    1. Re:Wizardry by CashCarSTAR · · Score: 1

      You forgot Game Arts.

      Lunar and Grandia, some of the most entertaining and challenging JRPGS ever made.

      But yea, people tend to forget that there is more than Square in this genre. In fact, there is more than Final Fantasy. Want a non-linear JRPG? Try the Saga series. It's not that GOOD, but it's something.

    2. Re:Wizardry by PainKilleR-CE · · Score: 1

      I think it's more to the point that FF is the most well-known of the JRPG series. Even most of the stuff mentioned in the previous post was at least published by Enix, which is part of Square now.

      Personally, I like the SaGa series (at least, what I've played of it, which admittedly isn't much), but it's very definitely a different style of game. Still, the games are very much story-driven, just as the FF games are, even if you get to choose the order in which the parts of the story are told.

      --
      -PainKilleR-[CE]
  14. The game you are looking for by Tirel · · Score: 1

    is called daggerfall.

    Be warned about two things though:
    1) The graphics suck
    2) it can ruin your (real) life.

  15. depends by August_zero · · Score: 1

    It depends on what your playing.

    Sure, we all have a pretty good idea of what a typical Japanese RPG is, but this ignores the fact that they are not all the same. For every Final Fantasy style game, there is a Dragon Quest style game with its own look and feel. Not all games force you to move from one cut scene to another, it just so happens that the most popular and most easily recognized Japanese RPGs do.

    Western RPGs have their draw backs as well though. Games like Balder's gate or Morrowind are absurdly long, 60 hours plus, and while I personally appretiate the depth and breadth of the worlds that these two series bring me, I find myself getting bored with the relaxed pacing. I never finished Morrowind or Balder's Gate despite putting in crap tons of hours. I certainly enjoyed them but how much is too much?

    I would say my personal all time favorite RPGs are mostly Japanese, but not the typical choices you may be expecting:(in no paticular order)
    Final Fantast Tactics
    Vagrant Story
    Valkyrie Profile
    Final Fantasy 4
    Fallout

    --
    On Wall Street they say "buy low, sell high" On the pad we say, "buy high, sell high" Isn't that somehow better?
    1. Re:depends by Txiasaeia · · Score: 1
      There are *really* people out there who consider games like Baldur's Gate I and II to be *too* long? No wonder the devs made NWN so short!

      Seriously man, give these two another go. The ultimate conclusion of the plot in Throne of Bhaal is incredible.

      --
      Condemnant quod non intellegunt.
    2. Re:depends by Lucia_Inverse · · Score: 1

      agreed BG 1 and 2 were 2 slow paced for my tastes as well try Neverwinter... it is exclent it sucks you in and doesnt let go the story is exclent

    3. Re:depends by IIRCAFAIKIANAL · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Games like Balder's gate or Morrowind are absurdly long, 60 hours plus

      Somebody hasn't played Dragon Warrior VII - I'm 60 hours in and I still have at least 10 hours before I can beat it. DWVII also features interesting character customization abilities - not too different than FFV or FFT - though it would easily take 200+ hours to master all the classes for everyone.

      For comparison, I beat morrowind in around 40 hours and baldur's gate in 60 hours (and I did every single quest in baldur's gate too).

      Final Fantasy tactics rocks too - i like games that make me think and the controversial (if your catholic) plot was a nice change from "kill the foozle" (well, you do kill a foozle in FFT, but anyway). We need more like it.

      --
      Robots are everywhere, and they eat old people's medicine for fuel.
    4. Re:depends by August_zero · · Score: 1

      Oh no I know how long DW7 is, but I was able to stick with it a lot longer, it just has, IMO much better pacing. Balders gate was like this big rut: welcome to town, half a dozen people unload their troubles on me, I run around and solve the quests, move on to next area. Sure this is typical RPG structure and certainly DW7 does it too, but its so much more elegant in DW7, and it ultimately leads to a more interesting game.

      --
      On Wall Street they say "buy low, sell high" On the pad we say, "buy high, sell high" Isn't that somehow better?
    5. Re:depends by Anthony+Boyd · · Score: 1
      I beat morrowind in around 40 hours and baldur's gate in 60 hours (and I did every single quest in baldur's gate too).

      Not in a single 60-hour game you didn't. Certain quests are spawned by alignment and people in your party -- there is no possible way to have every NPC join your group at every required point that a side quest can spawn, and there is no way to have every alignment in a single game. In addition, certain quests are based on other quests -- if you did one, then the rest are closed to you. You wouldn't be able to do all the quests. Hell, even if you used a hack to allow you to try everything, the class-related quests would work out bizarrely if you weren't right. And of course, if you're using a hack, the entire concept of a 60-hour game is suspect.

    6. Re:depends by evilhayama · · Score: 1

      I definitely agree with this, I recently tried to play Morrowind and was really impressed with how much freedom I had. This was until I got lost several times, died a bit, and then couldn't find where the plot was going. I gave up playing that and went back to finishing Final Fantasy Tactics, which has a linear storyline, but it's a good one. Sometimes all I want is a good story which I have to fight for.

    7. Re:depends by mink · · Score: 1

      NWN short? It's only as short as your imagination... Or are you talking about the near useless module included in the box, do people even play that?

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
  16. Is your goal in life a sixteen year old jgirl? by Thinkit3 · · Score: 1

    Thought so.

    --
    -Libertarian secular transhumanist
  17. I just couldn't help thinking this by Kargan · · Score: 2, Interesting

    As I was reading the article and the responses here, I just couldn't help thinking "what about pen & paper RPGs?" I know, I know, it's not technology, it's not computers...but it could be, in the game. That's the whole point of "actual" RPGs, they can be anything and everything you want them to be. Don't like a rule the people who made the game came up with? Don't use it! Make up your own! Why not? Do whatever is the most fun for you and your friends. I dunno. Maybe I'm just a geek.

    --
    Palaces, barricades, threats, meet promises
  18. Western RPGS by Poofat · · Score: 1

    Although I like Final Fantasy and Dragon Warrior/Quest, Games like Baldur's Gate, Fallout, and Morrowind completley outclass even the best final fantasies.

  19. Star Ocean 2, perhaps? by Stephen+Williams · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's a Japanese RPG, with all the elements you expect (linear main plot, cuteness in spades). However, character recruitment and development is more open than in many JRPGs.

    (Heehee, the first time I tried to type "JRPG", it came out as "JPEG". Fingers on autopilot!)

    At the beginning of the game, you choose whether to play as the male or female lead. Some events play out differently depending on your choice. At least one secondary character is only recruitable if you play as the girl.

    Recruiting some characters closes the door on others. If you recruit Ashton, you can't recruit Opera. And unless you recruit Opera, you can't recruit Ernest. Furthermore, the characters aren't just given to you; you have to explore a bit and pay attention to NPC hints in order to find some of them.

    When you enter a town, the characters all split up to go shopping. You control only the lead character, and can wander around the town looking for your friends. Sometimes, an extended conversation happens which can affect the relationship between the two characters. This can ultimately affect the game's ending. (There's no guarantee that the male and female leads end up as a couple).

    You can also teach skills such as cooking, alchemy, metalworking etc. to different characters. That's not compulsory; you could forego that aspect of the game completely and just concentrate on battle skills if you want. It just adds another dimension to the character customization.

    -Stephen

  20. How can you even compare the two types? by lidocaineus · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Seriously; I love well told stories and interesting plot developments, hence, I love the good JRPGs, such as Phantasy Star 1/2/4, Chrono Trigger, PANZER DRAGOON SAGA, and some FF games.

    When I want a very customizable dungeon crawl/quest-oriented game, CRPGs fit the bill. The shortcomings with these are the exact opposite of JRPGs; weak stories most of the time (there are some notable exceptions such as Fallout and Planescape: Torment) and more of an emphasis on character stats.

    It really has to do with the roots of the genre; CRPGs borrow heavily from traditional role playing and dice throwing, while JRPGs.. well, don't. Honestly, to me, they're practically separate genres. It's like comparing sports games and sport simulation games.

    The only real problem I have with CRPGs is the idiotic tendency to lean towards fantasy settings, most of which I consider incredibly boring. Give me a nice sci-fi or original setting. How many times do I need to hear pseudo-british like accents and cast fireballs? Heaven forbid someone come up with a cool idea transplanted into a modern day setting!,

  21. Planescape: Torment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If anyone says that western RPGs are too bland, and don't have enough story, they haven't played Planescape: Torment. One should be forced to play this game before rendering a decision on this issue.

  22. Art matters, too. by NetDanzr · · Score: 1

    How about art? There are some people who are no fond of running around with spiked hair, a six-foot sword and the eyes of the size of coasters. While we don't try to wipe such games of the face of earth, we choose to ignore them on the store shelves and rather opt for games where your character actually looks vaguelly human (or reptilian or feline, for that matter). As it so happens, people like would pick a western RPG over a Japanese RPG 99.9% of the time. But as they say - there's no coounting for taste. You pick a game you like better, and as long as there are western RPGs around, I'll pick what I like.

    1. Re:Art matters, too. by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1
      Apart from the quibe that 56% of statistics are made up on the spot I have to disagree with you a bit. Sure there is no accounting for taste in liking or disliking the art in a game.

      For myself however I would have missed a great game in Planetscape Torment if I had let myself be turned off by the huge boobs. Every female character no matter her age had a rack that would make Dolly Parton go "Ouch my back".

      Great games are more then just the artwork. Maybe I am just to old and to used to games where you were glad to be able to tell the difference between youre character and a tree ;)

      --

      MMO Quests are like orgasms:

      You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    2. Re:Art matters, too. by NetDanzr · · Score: 1

      I agree that great games need more than artwork, but in the case of RPGs, the atmosphere is still the king. I've been playing games ever since I remember, and I must admit that with rare exceptions, DOS games have had the best atmosphere. Games like DUngeon Master, the Wizardry series, Might and Magic series, Ultima Underworld, Lands of Lore, the Ishar series and the Eye of the Beholder series never leave my harddrive. All these games have one thing in common: they take place in a fantasy world that's more familiar to me, mimicking medeival Europe. As such, I expect the characters to look vaguelly human, and if they don't they are just out of place and I can't make myself to care enough to actually play the role of my character. Of course, others may prefer their fantasy worlds to be inhabited by anime characters, and the sales figures just prove that many are. I guess I'm just too old and set in my ways to change and enjoy that kind of graphics.

  23. Fallout. Fall + Out. by LiberalApplication · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I used to feel the way you did too, until I played Fallout (okay, I played Ultima 6 and loved it too, but that was after I played Fallout, when I found it in a bargain bin). Fallout had this magical way of making you feel like you were in control, without making the consequences of your actions so bland and meaningless that you felt the control wasn't worth anything. Almost everything you did was reflected in the events around you, the way people spoke to you, and the game felt like a one-size-fits-all sock. No matter how bad your feet smelled or how deformed your toes were, it just fit.

    Your dialogue options varied depending on your skills and your stats. If you were highly intelligent, you could talk circles around people. If you reduced your Int stat to one, your dialogue options would be reduced to "Ungh", "Gah", "Hrrrngh", and "Die".

    If you ran around killing children in towns, you'd be labelled a childkiller, and townspeople hundreds of miles away would have heard about you and think you were a freak. You could be a hero, a slut, a pornstar, and get what you want via good or evil, or sleeping with the mobster's wife. But none of it felt meaningless because for everything you could possibly do, the developers had thousands of lines of scripted dialogue waiting to accommodate your actions.

    Of course, most of the people I've gotten to play it have given up because of the game's immensely slow startup into the story, but once you're in, you'll love it.

  24. Re:RPGs that combine elements of both JRPG & U by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I think Planetscape Torment might fit that bill. You start out with 1 character wich you do not name, The nameless one, and a sidekick. But how you play that character is up to you and in a way that is even the goal of the game. Since you have a pretty defined and extensive past (you are someone who doesn't passover when you die you just lost youre memory but stayed in the same body) it is now up to you to decide who you really are.

    One of the most important parts of the game has someone ask you "What can change the nature of a man" while the answer is open it nonetheless feels very important to answer it correctly.

    The game itself made little difference on how you behaved, but it made you feel that the choices you made where nonetheless important. Very well done.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  25. Exile, Fallout by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

    I'd also recomment the (shareware!) Exile series. CRPG-style, "Western", where the game is very nonlinear. The Fallout series is also worth a look.

    I tend to also favor nonlinear ("Western") RPGs. I've always felt that if you're going to just want a movie, for the love of God, watch the move. Higher budget, and you don't have to do a bunch of work (build up, build up, build up) to watch little snippits of said low-budget movie.

    Now, a Western RPG lets you explore, do what you want.

    As an interesting aside, I think the reason they use the terms "Western" and "Eastern", and the fact that I use "computer RPG" and "console RPG" is because the Japanese love little closed, non-modifiable, single purpose consumer devices. Consumer electronics are huge in Japan. Computers, in the full-blown sense that we use them, are much bigger in the US. The consumer devices guide you along a path that the manufacturer chose, and the general-purpose computers let you do what you want, find your own way. This closely mirrors the way the Western and Eastern RPGs operate.

    1. Re:Exile, Fallout by TephX · · Score: 1
      I've always felt that if you're going to just want a movie, for the love of God, watch the move. Higher budget, and you don't have to do a bunch of work (build up, build up, build up) to watch little snippits of said low-budget movie.

      Console RPGs have a much broader scope than a movie. A novel might be a more fair comparison, but those don't have the audiovisual or interactive elements. A TV miniseries is probably the closest other medium. The experience is still pretty different, though.

      Now, a Western RPG lets you explore, do what you want.

      In return for meaningless characters and a boring plot, sure. (Granted, a lot of console-style RPGs have these problems too, but a computer-style RPG has them almost by definition.)

      As an interesting aside, I think the reason they use the terms "Western" and "Eastern", and the fact that I use "computer RPG" and "console RPG" is because the Japanese love little closed, non-modifiable, single purpose consumer devices. Consumer electronics are huge in Japan. Computers, in the full-blown sense that we use them, are much bigger in the US. The consumer devices guide you along a path that the manufacturer chose, and the general-purpose computers let you do what you want, find your own way. This closely mirrors the way the Western and Eastern RPGs operate.

      I think the reason they use the terms "Western" and "Eastern" is that they identified the games based on their place of origin, and the reason you (and I) use "computer RPG" and "console RPG" is because we identify them based on their platform. Now, consoles are a lot more popular in Japan than PCs, and perhaps vice versa in the US (although certainly not by as much). However, I think you're reading too much into this. There's absolutely no reason you can't write a {Western,console-style} RPG for the PC, and little reason it can't go the other way, although computer-style RPGs do tend to use features of the PC such as hard disks and network access that until recently haven't been available on consoles, and still aren't standard equipment.

      The fact that we don't see many console-style RPGs on PC (I'll ignore the other direction since the technical limitations are at least somewhat valid), I think, isn't even that they wouldn't sell. Rather, it's because the console market is significantly larger, especially when you consider Japan, and because developing for a console (note "a", you really used to have to pick just one and consider ports later, although this is becoming less true (however, RPGs seem to be some of th least cross-platform software out there)) is different enough from developing for PC that it's really tough to do both at once, almost like you're developing two totally separate backends that only get to share data files (and even those might need some editing to make full use of each platform's technical capabilities).

      --
      I metamoderate all Redundant and Offtopic moderations as Unfair.
    2. Re:Exile, Fallout by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      Console RPGs have a much broader scope than a movie. A novel might be a more fair comparison, but those don't have the audiovisual or interactive elements. A TV miniseries is probably the closest other medium. The experience is still pretty different, though.

      I don't agree. The story is mostly advanced during cutscenes/story bits...and there isn't more than two hours of cutscenes in any game that I can think of. The overland exploration mode and combat mode generally contain very little story advancement.

      In return for meaningless characters and a boring plot, sure. (Granted, a lot of console-style RPGs have these problems too, but a computer-style RPG has them almost by definition.)

      Meaningless? You develop them! They mean a lot more to me than some random scriptwriter's opinion of what a character should be like.

      There's absolutely no reason you can't write a {Western,console-style} RPG for the PC, and little reason it can't go the other way, although computer-style RPGs do tend to use features of the PC such as hard disks and network access that until recently haven't been available on consoles, and still aren't standard equipment.

      Sure, but I think that's my point. It's a cultural reason, not primarily a technological one. You really don't need *that* many of the extra things (though a keyboard might be nice) to make an open-ended game.

      Save games for a Western RPG certainly aren't anywhere near 8MB, so hard drives shouldn't be a limiting factor.

    3. Re:Exile, Fallout by TephX · · Score: 1
      I don't agree. The story is mostly advanced during cutscenes/story bits...and there isn't more than two hours of cutscenes in any game that I can think of. The overland exploration mode and combat mode generally contain very little story advancement.

      Umm... off the top of my head, every Final Fantasy game (to pick the most standard console-style RPGs there are) has more than two hours of cutscenes / story bits, counting all dialogue as "story bits", unless you read really fast. You're right that combat and the overworld map (for those games that have one, which up until recently was pretty much every console-style RPG) don't advance the plot much, but wandering around towns talking to people does. Also, if by "cutscene" you mean FMV only, you're forgetting all of the non-FMV dialogue.

      Admittedly the best novels have better stories than any RPG; of course, they have to, since that's all they've got, and also since there have been a whole lot more novels than console-style RPGs. Still, comparing a console-style RPG and a movie in scope just isn't right. Extremely few movies have more than five or six really well-developed characters. Any good console-style RPG has more than that.

      Meaningless? You develop them! They mean a lot more to me than some random scriptwriter's opinion of what a character should be like.

      You "develop" them in the sense that you choose their stats and abilities, but their personality? Most people don't bother. Think seriously about how much personality you've ascribed to even your most favorite computer-style RPG characters. Without personality, there can be no drama. Without drama, plot inevitably suffers terribly.

      As for whether the characters mean more or less than those developed by a scriptwriter, you of course are entitled to your opinion. However, the scriptwriters aren't "random", they're chosen because of their ability to write scripts. Creating a bunch of stats is easy; anyone can do that (and some console-style RPGs do more or less let you fully design your characters in regards to stats; however, I think this makes the game suffer, since characters become fungible in regards to gameplay). It takes skill to make a believable personality, though.

      Sure, but I think that's my point. It's a cultural reason, not primarily a technological one.

      Then I guess by your theory I'm at the least an anomaly, if not a counterexample, since I strongly prefer a PC that can do a lot of things to a one-use device, yet I greatly enjoy console-style RPGs and find computer-style RPGs merely an enormous waste of time.

      --
      I metamoderate all Redundant and Offtopic moderations as Unfair.
    4. Re:Exile, Fallout by PainKilleR-CE · · Score: 1

      I think the reason they use the terms "Western" and "Eastern" is that they identified the games based on their place of origin, and the reason you (and I) use "computer RPG" and "console RPG" is because we identify them based on their platform. Now, consoles are a lot more popular in Japan than PCs, and perhaps vice versa in the US (although certainly not by as much). However, I think you're reading too much into this. There's absolutely no reason you can't write a {Western,console-style} RPG for the PC, and little reason it can't go the other way, although computer-style RPGs do tend to use features of the PC such as hard disks and network access that until recently haven't been available on consoles, and still aren't standard equipment.

      I think the terms Console-RPG and Computer-RPG are used as much as Eastern-/Western- or American-/Japanese-, and all related to the primary origin of the style rather than any limitations. I've played some really bad ports of Console-RPGs, and I've played some Console-RPGs that were released only on the PC. Similarly, I've played some Computer-RPGs that were released only on a console (although most of these blend the elements of each style). You could probably also argue that Planescape:Torment had a lot of elements of a Console-RPG, despite being based on the BG engine and being a PC-only release.

      It has nothing to do with the requirements of the games, simply with the origins of the games, as well as the platform on which they are dominant (ie the FF series is very strong on consoles, the Baldur's Gate series is very strong on PCs, but you also see a very large number of games similar to FF on consoles, and a large number of games similar to BG on the PC (not just because Square makes a lot of console RPGs and a lot of PC-RPGs use the BG engine).

      It's not that the two platforms limit the games this way (although they may have in the past), it's that it's the traditional style of play on those platforms which leads to the genres being named this way. The FF games date back to the NES and span at least 4 major consoles (soon to be 5). The Ultima games date back to PCs most people probably couldn't even find today, and span most of the major Intel processors.

      --
      -PainKilleR-[CE]
    5. Re:Exile, Fallout by TephX · · Score: 1
      I think the terms Console-RPG and Computer-RPG are used as much as Eastern-/Western- or American-/Japanese-, and all related to the primary origin of the style rather than any limitations.
      [...]
      It's not that the two platforms limit the games this way (although they may have in the past), it's that it's the traditional style of play on those platforms which leads to the genres being named this way.

      I actually think I agree with you. Note how I (mistakenly) claimed that I use "computer RPG" and "console RPG" early on in my post, and then actually used "computer-style RPG" and "console-style RPG". This is because if you leave off the "style", people sometimes assume that you mean literally what you're saying, viz. games written for that particular platform.

      I've noted the lack of good terms for these two types of game before. It's kind of annoying, because they're really separate genres, or at least subgenres, that have about as much in common as go-kart racing and a realistic car simulation, or tournament fighters and brawlers, but people who don't really know anything about either one tend to assume they're the same since they have the same name. "Oh, that's an RPG, you'd like that." I think the most accurate term for what I generally end up calling console-style RPGs is "story-driven RPGs" (or "plot-driven RPGs" if you won't accept that... some computer-style RPGs might be considered story-driven, but very few if any even have a plot). This leaves me without a good term for computer-style RPGs, though... tactical RPGs? That implies that console-style RPGs aren't tactical, though, which isn't always the case (FFX's battles seem pretty tactical) and the first thing it makes me think of is FF Tactics anyway. Non-linear RPGs? That makes me think of Saga Frontier and Legend of Mana, even though I never played either of them. Freeform RPGs? I think that's the best I can come up with.

      Of course, to enable non-players to differentiate between them, they shouldn't have the "RPG" part in common, in which case I'd probably use RPG for computer-style RPGs (which I don't like, but to be fair, they involve a lot more "role-playing" than console-style RPGs do) and "plot game" for console-style RPGs. This would probably end up including some games we wouldn't think of as console-style RPGs (or any kind of RPG, for that matter) today, but I still think it would be more accurate. But no one will change their terms anyway.

      --
      I metamoderate all Redundant and Offtopic moderations as Unfair.
    6. Re:Exile, Fallout by PainKilleR-CE · · Score: 1

      I've noted the lack of good terms for these two types of game before. It's kind of annoying, because they're really separate genres, or at least subgenres, that have about as much in common as go-kart racing and a realistic car simulation, or tournament fighters and brawlers, but people who don't really know anything about either one tend to assume they're the same since they have the same name. "Oh, that's an RPG, you'd like that."

      I agree, and even though I like fighting games I don't really know the difference between say a brawler or a tournament fighter (though if I knew, it might explain some of my likes/dislikes in those cases). Personally, I tend to like both console- and computer- RPGs, but like them for different reasons (and part of that is probably because I grew up with both systems and approached them both without expectations either way). Console-RPGs and Computer-RPGs don't share a lot in common other than say various stats for the characters, but then RPG tends to be a fairly watered-down term with any electronic game, anyway (try defining what makes a game an RPG when it comes to computer or console-based games).

      I think the most accurate term for what I generally end up calling console-style RPGs is "story-driven RPGs" (or "plot-driven RPGs" if you won't accept that... some computer-style RPGs might be considered story-driven, but very few if any even have a plot).

      I usually use story-driven for the typical FF-type games. It still fits with say SaGa or Legend of Mana, but doesn't seem to apply as much, so I try to let people know that those games are a bit different, and most people don't like SaGa for one reason or another ;)

      This leaves me without a good term for computer-style RPGs, though... tactical RPGs?

      This one I usually leave at computer-style. Most people understand if they've played computer RPGs before, or I will associate it with one of the previous computer RPGs that is similar, such as Ultima or BG (which have decidedly different styles, too), or even Diablo, which is more of a hack-n-slash style.

      That implies that console-style RPGs aren't tactical, though, which isn't always the case (FFX's battles seem pretty tactical) and the first thing it makes me think of is FF Tactics anyway.

      Exactly, tactical RPGs tends to be used more for FFTactics, Tactics:Ogre, Front Mission 3, etc. Those games are very heavily tactical and a lot less on the RPG side anyway. I don't take it as meaning that other styles of RPG aren't really tactical, but rather than these emphasize tactics over anything else (and FF games really emphasize story, I'd guess computer games really emphasize character-building, but some people disagree, perhaps because they aren't really role-playing as much in these games as others).

      Non-linear RPGs? That makes me think of Saga Frontier and Legend of Mana, even though I never played either of them. Freeform RPGs? I think that's the best I can come up with.

      Both simply bring to mind the same thing, to me, and fits with some games in both computer-style and console-style RPGs. Computer games will often have a less linear style, while still being fairly linear (ie a side-quest may not be as obviously a side-quest in a computer-RPG, because the story may not be as clear-cut), SaGa Frontier and the like still tend to focus on the story, but let you play it out from a number of angles and in differing orders (ie you can start one story then switch to a different character if you get bored or feel that it's getting a little too challenging, or just feel like seeing another part of the story in the same time period).

      Of course, to enable non-players to differentiate between them, they shouldn't have the "RPG" part in common, in which case I'd probably use RPG for computer-style RPGs (which I don't like, but to be fair, they involve a lot more "role-playing" than console-style RPGs do) and "plot game" for console-style RPGs. This would probabl

      --
      -PainKilleR-[CE]
    7. Re:Exile, Fallout by TephX · · Score: 1
      I agree, and even though I like fighting games I don't really know the difference between say a brawler or a tournament fighter (though if I knew, it might explain some of my likes/dislikes in those cases).

      Tournament figher: Street Fighter. Brawler: Final Fight (or more recently, The Bouncer). You probably did know the difference but the latter category didn't occur to you... brawlers aren't extremely common these days, and most people just call tournament fighters "fighting games".

      Console-RPGs and Computer-RPGs don't share a lot in common other than say various stats for the characters, but then RPG tends to be a fairly watered-down term with any electronic game, anyway (try defining what makes a game an RPG when it comes to computer or console-based games).

      I can't, but I think the main reason for that is precisely the existence of these two significantly different categories of games which are both referred to as RPGs. :-) The way I'd probably do it is to give a list of characteristics, and the more a game has, the more RPG-like it is:

      • Strong story - the story drives the action rather than vice versa
      • Battles where you give commands to your characters rather than controlling their actions in realtime (there are a few borderline games like Secret of Mana, but even that has menus)
      • Experience points you earn by defeating monsters, or some equivalent system (such as FFX's Sphere Grid)
      • Fantasy setting, or sci-fi but with magic (this is incidental, but seems to be very strongly associated with RPGs anyway)
      • You control more than one character at once
      • Stats-based gameplay in general
      • Long playtime before beating the game

      There are almost certainly more characteristics, but I don't feel like trying to think of all of them at the moment.

      This one I usually leave at computer-style. Most people understand if they've played computer RPGs before, or I will associate it with one of the previous computer RPGs that is similar, such as Ultima or BG (which have decidedly different styles, too), or even Diablo, which is more of a hack-n-slash style.

      I haven't played Diablo, but I've heard it described as "Nethack with graphics".

      Even if we decide to say that computer RPGs are 'character-driven' and console RPGs are 'story-driven', people will come forward stating that console RPGs have more character detail, even though the only reason I choose character-driven is because I believe the player develops the character through the game, and this drives the game forward more than the story, which drives progress in a console-RPG (you really can't develop the character in a standard console-RPG, the characters develop through the story, although arguably in the first FF and some other console-RPGs the character is still a blank slate and can be developed by the player to some extent).

      I wouldn't really say they're character-driven. The vast majority of plots are driven by their characters, whereas characters that aren't predefined can't really make scripted choices, thus they aren't really driving the game. I'd say that computer-style RPGs are gameplay-driven, but "character building" is a pretty good description of the main part of the gameplay.

      The only thing that determines whether or not your characters are the Light Warriors in FF1 is whether or not you can finish the game, whereas in KOTOR you can finish the game in a number of different ways, depending on how you play your character.

      FF1 is actually a kind of unusual game, and fits poorly into either of these two categories (understandable, since it was almost genre-defining). It has a pretty much linear plot (and not an incredibly strong one, either, although to be fair it didn't seem as clicheed when the game was first released), but quite a lot of freedom in defining your characters (really, I think the reason for what inflexibility there is was largely technical; there wasn't enough room on an NES cart to let you customize your characters that much).

      --
      I metamoderate all Redundant and Offtopic moderations as Unfair.
    8. Re:Exile, Fallout by PainKilleR-CE · · Score: 1

      Tournament figher: Street Fighter. Brawler: Final Fight (or more recently, The Bouncer). You probably did know the difference but the latter category didn't occur to you... brawlers aren't extremely common these days, and most people just call tournament fighters "fighting games".

      OK, I get it now, it's probably more that I haven't really played a brawler since the Genesis days than anything else, unless you include the extra mode in a couple of the Tekken console games. For some reason I was thinking that there might be some kind of genre distinction between Virtua Fighter and Tekken (and there might be in Japan, where the fighting games are taken a little more seriously it seems).

      I can't, but I think the main reason for that is precisely the existence of these two significantly different categories of games which are both referred to as RPGs. :-)

      There's a lot of blending of categories on both sides, too, and a lot of games that incorporate 'RPG elements', such as Deus Ex and the handful of card games out there (Pokemon, Yu-Gi-Oh, etc). Then there's the argument over whether or not Diablo is an RPG, and the games that came out using a similar style.

      The way I'd probably do it is to give a list of characteristics, and the more a game has, the more RPG-like it is:

      * Strong story - the story drives the action rather than vice versa
      * Battles where you give commands to your characters rather than controlling their actions in realtime (there are a few borderline games like Secret of Mana, but even that has menus)


      This is really highly dependant on the battle system used in the game. .hack has menus for spells and skills, but at the basic level you move around and attack with your weapon by just doing it. Diablo is almost entirely directly controlled (and I believe this is part of why so many people have problems with it being called an RPG, although the fact that there are so many enemies you can wear out your mouse playing it also causes a lot of it).

      * Experience points you earn by defeating monsters, or some equivalent system (such as FFX's Sphere Grid)

      Or FF2 and some of the SaGa games using increasing skills based on use rather than just experience points with skill point rewards. I have a hard time thinking of any game that throws out experience entirely without trying to replace it with some kind of reward system for sinking time, though.

      * Fantasy setting, or sci-fi but with magic (this is incidental, but seems to be very strongly associated with RPGs anyway)

      I personally have a strong dislike of the fact that RPGs are so heavily linked with fantasy and magic. I would love to see more sci-fi, horror, etc. RPGs, but so many developers seem to be stuck in the fantasy rut (even the newer FFs that try to add some sci-fi elements don't really get out of the rut). Fallout was great both for it's system and for it's setting (and the way it incorporated the setting so well).

      * You control more than one character at once

      Which you don't do in the later Ultima games, not to mention many, many other computer RPGs, and a handful of console RPGs. Console RPGs have also gone more towards having most of the characters in a party change out quite a bit, to the point where you really only control one character through the game, but at any time you may control N number of characters.

      * Stats-based gameplay in general
      * Long playtime before beating the game


      and, as mentioned before, the computer RPGs usually have the long playtimes in excess of most others. Some computer RPGs have even gone far overboard in the number of stats they display for the player, even if the player can have no control over those stats.

      There are almost certainly more characteristics, but I don't feel like trying to think of all of them at the moment.

      But of course, the main thing is that mo

      --
      -PainKilleR-[CE]
  26. Re:RPGs that combine elements of both JRPG & U by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

    I'm curious -- why do you like vi more?

    Most people I've seen that prefer vi do so because it has a fast startup time (so they can open one instance per document), or because they got used to it on BSD (which has a strong vi tradition).

    I use vi only for editing of large files, since AFAIK emacs cannot do out-of-memory editing.

  27. Lionheart by cbuskirk · · Score: 1

    I have high hopes for Black Isle Studio's Lionheart. It uses the same S.P.E.C.I.A.L RPG system as Fallout and I imagine it will be very open ended. In the Demo I killed a merchant out in the woods. Instead of all of the NPC's coming after me like in other RPG's I got the Merchant Slayer Perk which said the "The Underground notes that you have an inclination towards killing merchants." Which I am sure would lead to side quests later in the game. If it is anything like Fallout you should be able to do whatever you want in the game, and find it enjoyable.

    1. Re:Lionheart by spitzig · · Score: 1

      Yeah, there was a link to the demo on the article's site. I didn't know it was out. I've been looking forward to Lionheart for a while. I didn't know there were still so many OTHER fans of Fallout(actually, I only played Fallout 2).

  28. Re:RPGs that combine elements of both JRPG & U by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1
    Sorry to moderators, this is off topic but the guy asked alright?

    Very simple. I like the difference between edit and command mode. I don't know why but the first time I used it on an AIX machine it just worked for me. I have tried other editors and all of them feel annoying after vi. In gentoo wich comes with an oddball "simpler" editor I always end up with x, i and a all over the place :)

    To be honest I never tried emacs for more then a few seconds. I just can't/don't want to get used to it.

    But yes the main reason to like it apart from just familiarity is its small size. I use editors to edit code usually on remote machines. So I want something that is tiny, fast and not to graphical.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  29. Re:RPGs that combine elements of both JRPG & U by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

    Huh. That's actually a good point -- I think that a lot of editor infighting comes from the fact that people have made a serious time investment in really learning one editor, definitely do not want to do the same for another editor, and can't stand the thought of having to learn another. So folks start out with one and then argue in favor of it.

    I happened to start with emacs, mostly because a professor of mine happened to recommend it, and I've generally preferred it to vi ever since, but I also have about five years of heavy use sunk into it, and I'm comfortable writing my own functions and extensions to the editor. Once you do that, the idea of learning another editor just isn't really appealing.

  30. Greater Cultural Differences? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As an American visiting Japan, I was struck by the way the Japanese seem to play games which emphasized chance over choice. I remember playing a game of "Uno" where the rules had been changed to eliminate the role of strategy. The most basic example of this is the difference between Pachinko and Pinball.

  31. It's just personal taste... by gtshafted · · Score: 1
    From my experience here are the differences between Western and Eastern RPGs:

    JRPGS:
    Mostly console only which results in:
    -You put the damm disc into the machine and it magically works! (though lately console games are begining to crop bad bugs)
    -Graphics: Typically jrpgs are visually more pleasing than wrpgs, even though wrpgs run on much better hardware
    -Extremely linear storyline: some people like it and some people don't, I think this stems from most consoles not having a harddrive and also from Asian culture in general...
    Being Asian myself and having experienced both Western and Eastern cultures all my life, what I found is people in the East typically like following the group line more than being a bit more individualistic. That being said most gamers in Asia care more about aestetics and a linear engaging storyline than more freedom to do what you want in a game. This might change since the advent of MMORPGs, Capcom's translation of GTA, and maybe even a J - KOTOR port... inspiring change in jrpg game design
    -replayabilty: really really limited, unless you have a lot of time on your hands (or are too poor buy a new game and too conscientious to pirate one) to unlock secrets (of which are important to some and not important to most people) or replay the same exact game experience over and over over again. Game times are also typically also around 20-30 hours.

    WRPGS:
    Mostly PC only which results in:
    -Bugs galor! Patches and Driver downloads are very common.
    -Graphics: Graphics in game are now almost par (The exception is Morrowind) but still not as good as JRPGs. Cinematic movies typically suck or are nonexistent (if you consider Diablo an rpg then that's the exception) compared to JRPGs.
    -A living storyline: freedom. With a harddrive, games like the Fallout and the Baldur's Gate series allow an unmatched amount of freedom to do things in their worlds. In Baldur's Gate II it's not just your actions that changes the storyline, but also the party members you pick to join you that changes the it. From scanning forums, I was surprised that even playing a different gender changes the storyline. I mean you could even choose your love interest in baldur's gate as opposed to being assigned one in the FF series. The only JRPG that I've played that was good that somewhat allowed for this (but not really) was Ogre Battle.
    -Extreme replayability: since in one game you could save the world... in another you could either conquer or destroy it hehehe Game times are also enormous. Baldur's Gate 2 could easily net you 120 hours to finish! This definitely lasts you a year and unlike a JRPG, could kill any productivity you have

    Personal Opinion:
    While I have grown up playing stuff like the FFs and Phantasy Stars and largely ignored the Ultimas (mainly b/c when I was an elementary school kid VGA monitors were pricey), I like WRPGS (expecially the baldur's gate series) much more than I do JRPGs. Aside from aestithics (which are incredible), JRPGS haven't really evolved. You have to do and be everything that a game designer has already decided for you. For me, it's very hard to get lost in a world where you don't have any choice as to actually changing it with your own chosen actions. I'll happily apply patches and play with a less eye candy just to have that freedom. On the bright side, I could actually put down a JRPG after 2 hours and actually get work done. JRPGs are probably better for society since they're less addicting

    Still it really depends on what you value most personally.

    1. Re:It's just personal taste... by PainKilleR-CE · · Score: 1

      JRPGS:
      Mostly console only which results in:
      -You put the damm disc into the machine and it magically works! (though lately console games are begining to crop bad bugs)
      -Graphics: Typically jrpgs are visually more pleasing than wrpgs, even though wrpgs run on much better hardware


      This is just a matter of what pleases your eye. WRPGs tend towards more 'realistic' graphics, whereas JRPGs tend towards anime-like graphics. One is easier to pull off than the other (though I'd note that certain new technologies (like cell shading) are harder to actually do but look better for anime-style, and the game that's used this best so far in JRPGs is routinely panned as a bad game).

      -Extremely linear storyline: some people like it and some people don't, I think this stems from most consoles not having a harddrive and also from Asian culture in general...
      Being Asian myself and having experienced both Western and Eastern cultures all my life, what I found is people in the East typically like following the group line more than being a bit more individualistic. That being said most gamers in Asia care more about aestetics and a linear engaging storyline than more freedom to do what you want in a game. This might change since the advent of MMORPGs, Capcom's translation of GTA, and maybe even a J - KOTOR port... inspiring change in jrpg game design


      I think another thing that influences the way in which the games play has to do with the roots of the genre in the two areas. FF and DQ were wildly popular in Japan and, as far as most western gamers know, are basically the roots of a great deal of what we call JRPGs. These games set the tone of much of the games that are played today. On the other hand, the western design owes a lot to the Ultima series, which was strongly based on moral choices effecting the game in one way or another. Over time people have tried to extend this by allowing more endings to games and having the overall look of the game change with your moral choices.

      -replayabilty: really really limited, unless you have a lot of time on your hands (or are too poor buy a new game and too conscientious to pirate one) to unlock secrets (of which are important to some and not important to most people) or replay the same exact game experience over and over over again. Game times are also typically also around 20-30 hours.

      This is also why there are a lot more time-sink type of side-quests in JRPGs. You could spend hours and hours doing things totally unrelated to the plot in later FF games and Shenmue, but ultimately you have to go back to the story to finish the game. On the other hand, in the western games sometimes the side-quests have little to differentiate them from the main quests, or can influence what happens in the main quests of the game.

      WRPGS:
      Mostly PC only which results in:
      -Bugs galor! Patches and Driver downloads are very common.


      This depends highly on the developers of the game in question, and the system on which you play it. Many of those bugs can be hardware specific, which means some portion of the player base never sees them in the first place. Also, RPGs, until very recently, have tended to be somewhat far behind the curve in terms of graphics, so they've escaped many of the bugs that FPS players are used to. OTOH, RPG players don't always keep up with the hardware side the way FPS players would, so they may still be having problems that an FPS player would not (because of newer, more capable hardware).

      -Graphics: Graphics in game are now almost par (The exception is Morrowind) but still not as good as JRPGs. Cinematic movies typically suck or are nonexistent (if you consider Diablo an rpg then that's the exception) compared to JRPGs.

      But many would say that cinematic sequences are a primary drawback of JRPGs in the first place, as they take you out of character and remove some of your influence over the story. Similarly, the graphics are just as good in most western RPGs as thos

      --
      -PainKilleR-[CE]
  32. Well by randomlogik · · Score: 1

    I kinda grew up playing western rpgs. i didnt have any consoles when i was young, but we had the family computer. i was addicted to the (now boring) Wizardry dungeon crawler games, various D&D games andbest of all the Ultima Series. In fact I LOVED the Ultima series. I own original copies of 4, 5, 6, 7 (and the expansion packs) and 8. I loved the Brittania world, I loved the storyline ansd grew attatched to the characters. Even though I enjoyed playing the more non linear D&D style create-your-character games - they just couldnt pull me with the kind of storyline that games like Ultima had. Nothing can really beat a well written and delievered storyline. Not long after Ultima V or VI came out, I got a SNES, and played Secret of Mana. Again I was hooked. Then Chrono Trigger ( i needednt say anything for this one ). I played the FF games but didnt enjoy them nearly as much My point is that its not really a JRPG vs WRPG arguement here. Yes both cultures have certain gaming trends. But most here are arguing the Pre-Defined-Storyline RPG vs Non-Linear-RPG archetypes. The Ultima games, in my opinion (and some of the most fondly remembered WRPGS) have more in common with games like Chrono Trigger or Seiken Densetsu series - than with the traditional western D&D style RPG. Thats my 2 cents anyway

    1. Re:Well by mink · · Score: 1

      The funny thing is that Dragon Quest (Dragon Warrior over here) was spawned from Dungeons and Dragons players in Japan.
      anyone who thinks RPG games over there were not influenced by D&D hasnt looked closely. Most things get a bit of a cultural twist, or borrow from the mythology/religion of the area.

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.