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."
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.
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.
Sci-fi? Sorry, out of luck
Fallout 1 and 2 ??
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.
[PowerPoint] is a tool for capitalist presentation
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
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.
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.
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.
Chrono Trigger.
_______
Death wish, n.:
The only wish that always comes true, whether or not one wishes it t
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?
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.
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.
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.
is called daggerfall.
Be warned about two things though:
1) The graphics suck
2) it can ruin your (real) life.
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?
Thought so.
-Libertarian secular transhumanist
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
Although I like Final Fantasy and Dragon Warrior/Quest, Games like Baldur's Gate, Fallout, and Morrowind completley outclass even the best final fantasies.
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.
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
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!,
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
May we never see th
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.
May we never see th
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.
May we never see th
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
May we never see th
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
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.)
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.
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
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 ;)
/. topic, we're seeing people arguing the merits of games which fall all over the place within that gradient.
:)
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
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
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
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.
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
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.