BioWare: Final Fantasy And The JRPG "Isn't Role-Playing"
Final Fantasy XIIIYeah, this is bound to cause some discussion. But we're not about to get dragged into an endless JRPG/WRPG battle, especially because one genre is beginning to look and play a lot like the other these days.
At any rate, BioWare Writing Director Daniel Erickson has opened up a can of worms by addressing Square-Enix's Final Fantasy XIII in a recent interview with Strategy Informer. In talking about Star Wars: The Old Republic, Erickson was asked about the the importance of storyline in his game, and FFXIII was mentioned. His reply is bound to raise the ire of JRPG fans:
"Well, before I address the main point I just want to take a slightly more controversial route: You can put a 'J' in front of it, but it's not an RPG. You don't make any choices, you don't create a character, you don't live your character... I don't know what those are - adventure games maybe? But they're not RPG's."
Obviously, he's not only talking about FFXIII, but just about any RPG where you don't create a character and follow a linear storyline. Essentially, this means he doesn't believe any Final Fantasy is an RPG, and other Japanese franchises like Suikoden are out, too. It's an argument that just doesn't die, but we will say that the more you give "choice" to the player, the less you can focus on a cohesive, engaging story. At some point, you get to a position where there is no story; just a lot of wandering around on the part of the player. That may be "true" role-playing but...well, it's not worth getting into, is it?
Related Game(s): Final Fantasy XIII
5/13/2010 9:28:14 PM Ben Dutka
Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter
Comments (124 posts)
Akuma07
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 12:08:44 AM
You were in control of what skills they learnt, how much exp they had, what items they had, what items they use.
You are essentially in control of that character. (and others)
In the real world, things happen around us, the world evolves at a rate, that we simply cannot control, and some times if not most of the time, we cannot control anything that happens.
10 up, 0 down
eLLeJuss
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 9:17:01 PM
0 up, 1 down
VicTheMighty
Saturday, May 15, 2010 @ 11:51:52 AM
I don't think so. This final XIII made me feel alot more like just plainly watching a movie without any real impact on anything. Final Fantasy titles were always borderline RPG if you ask me. And that might be why they are called JRPG lol... But FFXIII just crossed the line to just another action adventure game I think.
But anyway I don't think what we call a game is as important as the quality of the title.
Last edited by VicTheMighty on 5/15/2010 11:56:21 AM
2 up, 0 down
keo7
Thursday, May 13, 2010 @ 9:48:24 PM
Reply
3 up, 1 down
Dfreek31
Thursday, May 13, 2010 @ 9:50:07 PM
Reply
1 up, 2 down
Jawknee
Thursday, May 13, 2010 @ 9:57:58 PM
Reply
I never really cared about character creation. Squares characters are way better then anything i can think of.
PS1 and PS2 Final Fantasy's > anything from Bioware.
16 up, 9 down
Vitron
Thursday, May 13, 2010 @ 10:57:50 PM
11 up, 5 down
Jawknee
Thursday, May 13, 2010 @ 11:01:16 PM
Last edited by Jawknee on 5/13/2010 11:01:43 PM
7 up, 4 down
OtisFeelgood
Thursday, May 13, 2010 @ 11:29:39 PM
7 up, 4 down
johnld
Thursday, May 13, 2010 @ 11:52:50 PM
Last edited by johnld on 5/13/2010 11:54:58 PM
8 up, 2 down
Vitron
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 12:07:55 AM
Thank God I'm not weird.
Its not that I don't like WRPGs, Its that I just can't seem to like it better than JRPGs.
7 up, 1 down
Keeng
Saturday, May 15, 2010 @ 11:04:42 AM
Last edited by Keeng on 5/15/2010 11:05:15 AM
1 up, 0 down
Oxvial
Thursday, May 13, 2010 @ 9:58:28 PM
Reply
I didn't like FF13 but jabs like this makes me lose some respect at bioware.
Last edited by Oxvial on 5/13/2010 9:58:51 PM
10 up, 4 down
piratedrunk
Thursday, May 13, 2010 @ 10:02:03 PM
Reply
6 up, 5 down
Mavfan321
Thursday, May 13, 2010 @ 10:09:07 PM
Reply
4 up, 1 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, May 13, 2010 @ 10:15:30 PM
Reply
An RPG is basically an adventure game that lasts a helluvalot longer than any other game in which you have customization available and the ability to level up your character(s) and/or weapons and items in some way shape or form while advancing a storyline.
While FFXIII IS closer to an action/adventure than any previous FF, that doesn't give him the right to make such a statement.
Basically he is trying to say that only WRPGs are REAL RPGs. The problem with that is just what Ben says, I have yet to see a WRPG that has come within a lightyear of the stories told via role-playing in something like an FF universe.
Last edited by WorldEndsWithMe on 5/13/2010 10:16:11 PM
11 up, 3 down
netofobia
Thursday, May 13, 2010 @ 10:30:36 PM
I always thought that playing the role of an already established character while living a well scripted story still counted as roleplaying.
Go figure.
Though FFXIII did stray a bit too far. I feel they haven't been the same since IX. Everything after that just didn't have the same magical effect on me.
2 up, 0 down
johnld
Thursday, May 13, 2010 @ 11:59:01 PM
2 up, 0 down
netofobia
Thursday, May 13, 2010 @ 10:26:41 PM
Reply
I do have to say though, Dragon Age was amazing. Honestly, only RPG in the current generation to keep me interested enough to finish it (though Nier was definitely a fun time).
Maybe I'm just angry at the current state of the RPG in general. Been playing each one as it gets released, and very rarely do I find anything worth my limited time.
2 up, 2 down
Jackyl
Thursday, May 13, 2010 @ 10:48:48 PM
Reply
I do in part agree with Erickson. A game like Dragon Age is way more of an RPG experience than a game like FFXIII... still haven't gotten around to finishing the latter.
However, I won't say JRPGs aren't RPGs.
1 up, 1 down
Victor321
Thursday, May 13, 2010 @ 10:55:51 PM
Reply
I believe he's saying it in the light that the JRPG hasn't grown as much this console generation compared to previous ones. Also, his opinion is of his own, and not everyone at Bioware would agree right? I hope that's the case, as Bioware has dished out pure gold so far this generation, contrary to what anyone here says (and they're in the minority, compared to the people that only say good things about Bioware).
In the end, I merely hope he's in the minority who believe such a stupid thing, what with WRPGs superior to JRPGs....
Last edited by Victor321 on 5/13/2010 10:56:51 PM
4 up, 0 down
johnld
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 12:04:12 AM
3 up, 1 down
Kevadu
Thursday, May 13, 2010 @ 10:56:13 PM
Reply
However, the assertion that you have to create your own character for it to be an RPG is *completely* arbitrary. Bioware can use that as their definition of an RPG if they want, but it has nothing to do with what the rest of the world is thinking.
6 up, 0 down
Highlander
Thursday, May 13, 2010 @ 11:16:21 PM
Reply
It's no good coming along now and trying to apply a new set of criteria to the RPG genre. To me though it's kind of like trying to judge the quality of some apples based on the rules for identifying a quality orange.
5 up, 2 down
Fane1024
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 3:10:56 AM
As Hynad says below, he's NOT making a judgement about the relative quality of the games, but about the nature of the games.
Last edited by Fane1024 on 5/14/2010 3:15:43 AM
1 up, 1 down
Deleted User
Thursday, May 13, 2010 @ 11:29:51 PM
Reply
Some of you get butthurt over such petty stuff at times. ¬_¬
The RPG term has been misused by Japanese developers, who thought that levels and stats were the only thing that were important to warrant such a label.
When in fact, of course a RPG is about playing a role. You can't play a role if every single thing in the game is dictated by the story without ever giving the player so much of a choice to influence the outcome.
The WRPG genre, as much as it pains many of you to agree, is the closest we've ever had to a real RPG experience, no matter how boring, bland and monotone you might believe they are.
And this all come from someone who has Final Fantasy as its favorite franchise ever (which is composed more of Turn-Based adventure games than anything in my book).
7 up, 8 down
Vitron
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 12:02:52 AM
3 up, 2 down
johnld
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 12:09:15 AM
Last edited by johnld on 5/14/2010 12:09:30 AM
2 up, 0 down
Akuma07
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 12:11:48 AM
You are put into the role of a character, a character who feels certain ways about things, you control where he goes, what he does, what experience he has etc etc.
To say they arent RPGs i believe, is admitting that you dont understand the TRUE nature of an RPG game.
In the end WRPG and JRPG, they both do the same thing, except JRPGs take away some choices for the sake of an engaging story. Simple as that, they are 2 different styles of creating an RPG, either way, you are role playing someone. Correct?
No-one even knew what the term RPG ment, until Japan came along, so how about we give them some credit for creating one of the biggest genres in gaming.
Last edited by Akuma07 on 5/14/2010 12:14:14 AM
6 up, 4 down
Deleted User
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 12:43:42 AM
By the definition of many of you here, almost every games are RPG since you play the role of, say, Mario, Nathan Drake, Ryu, Snake, etc...
The terms Role Playing Game go way back to Dungeon and Dragon and the few bits that came before it. As such, the only genre that gets close to representing this in video game form is the WRPG genre and a select few games from Japan like Shenmue fit the criterias as well. Chrono Trigger is the first game from japan that got labeled as a RPG that actually tried to give the player choices, and you will notice that Crono (which is the player's avatar) never actually gets any dialog, to make sure the player will connect better to him.
You cannot roleplay a character if you're never offered a choice or alternatives. What you call JRPGs are Adventure games with often archaic battle systems.
And tell me how is it possible to roleplay a group of characters? And how can you identify to a character that has his own intricate thought patterns and make choices in your place, like how Cloud decided to lie about his past in FF VII... Surely, that's how you would have done things too, right?
Everything is scripted, no paths to choose to influence the grand scheme of things. Like a movie, mixed with gameplay sections to guide the characters from one unique episode to the next, just like stages in the good old beat-em ups.
In the end, if they were really RPGs, the debate wouldn't exist.
Last edited by n/a on 5/14/2010 12:48:40 AM
8 up, 10 down
Highlander
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 1:07:01 AM
Role play is simply playing a role. In a traditional JRPG there is a story and characters, yes they are existing characters that you do not create, but you determine how that character develops and what choices the character(s) make along the way. You play the role of that character within the story.
Your definition of a role playing game is much more like that of an MMORPG where each player character is essentially an avatar for the player. It's still a role playing game, just a different kind. To dismiss JRPGs as not being RPGs because they don't meet your extremely narrow definition is extremely closed minded.
I've played RPGs from D'nD through MMORPGs, it's not a requirement of RPGs that you create your character from scratch. You are imposing a requirement from your own point of view, which is no better than what Daniel Erickson does here. I don't see why I or anyone else should take his word for what an RPG is. Because he's a developer of games at Bioware? Nope, not good enough. I've played RPGs in various forms since 1984, and to be honest I doubt that Mr Erikson has played them for even half that time.
11 up, 4 down
Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 1:10:45 AM
The idea that video game role-playing is anything like - or should be anything like - the pencil & paper game has been erroneous from day one. Simply because the genre steals the name doesn't mean anything; we're talking about entirely different entertainment venues.
Based on YOUR definition, no WRPG is an RPG, either. None has ever given a player complete and total control, because that's impossible. In D&D, you create the entire world and every last character, enemy, and element of that world. According to you and everyone else who confuses D&D with video games, we'd have to simply create an avatar and then design the entire game from scratch ourselves. Even a scripted tree in a certain position is SCRIPTED; somebody else put it there.
That alone destroys your theory. We are ALWAYS playing something scripted; the only question is how MUCH of it is scripted. So just because we wander around more with a character we created means WRPGs are "true" RPGs? Just because we make a decision makes it "role-playing?" How? All we're doing is choosing one of several SCRIPTED branches. There's no such thing as saying, "nah, I think I'll just blow up the world instead."
What you're arguing doesn't, and couldn't, exist in video games. The sooner people get this, the better off we'll all be.
13 up, 6 down
Vitron
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 1:21:51 AM
2 up, 1 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 1:32:17 AM
8 up, 1 down
Kevadu
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 2:02:44 AM
I was actually agreeing with you for a while there, Akuma07, but this is just plain wrong. Japan did not in any way invent RPGs. Computerized roleplaying games predate personal computers, even. They were played on mainframes back in the 70s.
7 up, 0 down
piratedrunk
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 2:17:46 AM
I would easily take well written scripted story over boring false choices that rarely have any meaningful impact on the game.
6 up, 1 down
Akuma07
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 3:46:11 AM
EDIT: hahaha, sorry, i see what part your talking about, bit of a bad choice of words =]
Last edited by Akuma07 on 5/14/2010 3:47:36 AM
3 up, 0 down
Hawkeye
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 8:51:02 AM
And Ben, you are adding in the job of the GM or DM with that of the players. No one in D&D or Warhammer made their own adventure then played it themselves. And to suggest that’s what needs to be done for a video game to be a ‘true’ role playing game is, in my opinion, incorrect.
I would humbly suggest that there are two games that could be considered role playing in the pen and paper mentality. Fable and Oblivion. You decide what the characters do, sure it’s open ended, but to get to the end of the game there is still an ultimate goal. Same as RPG in the pen and paper era.
5 up, 0 down
Deleted User
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 9:14:38 AM
I'm taking a narrow, specific definition, and am extremely closed minded?
When you say I impose my requirements from my own point of view, well at the very least, I Do have a definition of what a RPG is and can explain it.
Both of you are basically not giving anything is return to counter what I explained.
Ben goes the semantic route and mentions how there has to be a Game Master creating a world for the ones Role Playing in it, failing to realize that that Game Master role is indeed handled by the Game itself.
Turning everything into derision like you both do doesn't make it clear that you have anything in store to properly define what a RPG is.
I mentioned the use of choices that help the player to better relate, identify and feel like being the character as a pre-requisite. Something that isn't offered by the Japanese games that people call JRPGs.
Of course, nothing will ever come close to giving you an infinite amount of choice branches. Yet, just like Platformers have to involve jumping on and over stuff to make it to the end of a level, how FPS must have the player shooting in first person, and Beat-Em Ups must have you walk through levels to fight a large number of enemies in unarmed combat or with melee weapons, so does a RPG give you choices to make your character influence the world he's in.
The definition I see most often is how such game requires you to play a character, have Levels, stats and a story.
If those are the only requirements, then Castlevania Symphony of the Night and The Adventure of Link are both RPGs, among countless other games that offer stats and level ups.
Like Ben pointed out without even noticing it, the amount of scripting in the gameplay and its story are key components in making a game be a RPG or not.
@Ben: The sooner people get this, the better off we'll all be? Surely you don't think this is THAT big a deal, do you?
Those are labels. Erroneous as they may be, they're still labels. They've been in use for way too long for any of us to wish they'd change.
But it still doesn't make the fact that they're erroneous labels go away.
Why do you think there were RPGs back then, yet now there are WRPGs and JRPGs. Two completely separate entities? No one would dare change an erroneous label that has been in use for way too long to bother.
Seriously, why anyone act all defensive and butthurt over such trivial things is beyond me.
Last edited by n/a on 5/14/2010 9:16:04 AM
6 up, 2 down
Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 10:32:52 AM
I never provided a definition of role-playing because the "RPG" category of gaming has been messed up for ages. It's chaotic. We have games that play completely differently from one another in the same genre; i.e., Oblivion and Valkyrie Profile. They may as well be in completely different genres, let alone sub-genres. I'm not as egotistical as you; I don't think I can apply the appropriate labels (as you do, despite saying they don't matter). I'm merely attacking your ridiculous train of thought.
And to assume I didn't realize what I was saying when I spoke about how all games have scripted events is insulting to me. You are not the be-all and end-all when it comes to this definition, my friend. You can act that way all you wish; the fact of the matter is all you're doing is trying to compare interactive video entertainment to an entirely different form of entertainment (the first incorrect move) and then trying to say those that are less scripted are actually RPGs.
Essentially, all you're saying is that if we create a character and wander around, that's an RPG. Nothing has to be done; nothing needs to be done; it's all in the player's heads. Everything is in our heads. Do you really think it matters if we make a character from scratch or if we assume the role of Cloud? When playing, we feel the same sensation; that we are playing a FANTASY character, and we step into his shoes. Even when creating our own, we're still only using scripted options. "Oh, I want his skin polka-dotted...can't do that? Not an RPG."
Kraygen made the point that creating a character or playing as a set character usually means nothing in gaming; things will play out in the script regardless. You want us to make claims on an RPG while you're saying absolutely nothing. You're just insulting us and then coming back to retarded assumptions. Heavy Rain has more branching options than most WRPGs, so I guess that's a "true" RPG.
You can defend them all you want. But to claim Western RPGs are somehow the only ones allowed to be called "role-playing" is simply being blind to how we play and experience video games. Don't wander in here and pretend to know everything else again, okay?
Last edited by Ben Dutka PSXE on 5/14/2010 10:34:08 AM
6 up, 4 down
Underdog15
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 10:46:44 AM
So uh, you have an example of a "True" rpg video game? You keep referring to D&D, but isn't that like... NOT a video game? I think the reason Highlander and Ben have accurately labeled your point of view as narrow, is because it really is just that... narrow.
I mean really... a hearty pat on the back to you for being able to clearly label it. But here's the hilarious part...
I bet if you give me any video game you feel fits YOUR definition... I could probably use your definition to explain why that game is not a true RPG.
Your definition is narrow because it cannot exist in video games. It limits creativity from the developer and the player. Often, the branches of choices given to a player aren't even accurate to the choices we would make. I, for one, consider human beings to be incredibly complex, and choices are rarely as straightforward as you would like them to be. Often, I find games limit the choices I would actually make. I mean really... how often do you get a list of 5 or 6 choices, and you say to yourself... "These -ALL- suck."
Personally, I don't give a rat's buttock about the definition of RPG. My beef is with individuals who take the high-and-mighty approach of laying their little 'g' godlike law over what is an isn't a true whatever (whether that be a true rpg, which FF is better, etc.).
What I CAN tell you, is that JRPG's got me into the RPG genre... for both WRPG and JRPG.
Because "RPG" is so hard to define in video games (I have often had trouble labeling it myself), I think Ben and Highlander have the right approach. You need to be a little more open minded to the labeling, and I think most of us can tell the difference between the video game concept of an RPG and an action/adventure.
But again... seriously. If your definition is so well thought out, give me a real example of a game that fits your definition, and I can use your porous definition to explain why it isn't, in your terms, a true RPG.
4 up, 3 down
Underdog15
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 10:53:16 AM
Genre labeling doesn't matter. It only promotes a high-and-mighty mentality from people who believe they're somehow better because they know the real definition.
Heavy Rain didn't even have a Genre to belong to when it first came out.
Also, read Kraygen's comment a little lower. It's fantastic.
Last edited by Underdog15 on 5/14/2010 10:55:55 AM
4 up, 2 down
Highlander
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 11:34:39 AM
You wrote
<<<I'm taking a narrow, specific definition, and am extremely closed minded?
When you say I impose my requirements from my own point of view, well at the very least, I Do have a definition of what a RPG is and can explain it.>>>
You are taking a narrow view and are closed minded because as you state here, *you* have a definition of what an RPG is and *you* can explain it. That sounds a lot like it's your definition and you wish to impose it. Unless someone died and made you god of RPGs you are not the genre definer.
RPG - Role Playing Game.
Strictly speaking an RPG is any game (video or otherwise) where you play a role.
If I am playing traditional D&D or GURPS style games with dice, and character sheets, then yes I am playing a role in a game and as it happens I created my character and am playing in an adventure that is moderated and scripted by the GM. That's a role playing game.
The way you have described your 'definition' of an RPG seems to me to be nothing more than a video game version of the dice and paper games. You appear to define RPGs in the video game world as MMORPGs where you create your character/avatar and make your own adventure in the open world. That's fine. But the thing is playing a role is not defined by the creation of the character, or playing in an open world. You play a role when you play a character. Like an actor you put on the character when you play. In Uncharted, you play the role of Nathan Drake. In Ratchet and Clank you primarily play the role of Ratchet. In both these games you decide what to do, you control the character's actions and decisions. In the broadest sense they are role playing games.
Classic RPGs such as the JRPG series like Final Fantasy are generally accepted to be role playing games. The newer WRPG genre is simply a less story driven, more open world variant of the traditional RPG, it's essentially a blending of the story driven mechanic and the open world mechanic made popular in World of Warcraft (which I assume you'd classify as an RPG). Either way, they are all role playing games, and universally accepted as such. For you to bounce in to this discussion with your own definition of what an RPG is, is a little on the arrogant side. To dismiss the categorization of games that has been accepted for two decades across the industry, is arrogant.
I said that you were being closed minded and narrow in your definition. I completely stand by that. In fact, having read your reply to myself and Ben, I am more than convinced of it.
5 up, 3 down
Kevadu
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 11:38:18 AM
I'm not quite sure what my point is other than that the dynamic between players and DM is not as simple as some people seem to think. Most of the DM's creativity goes into crafting the *scenario*, which isn't actually that different than the video game equivalent. It's just that with a video game it's the developers who create scenarios and you're generally handed one scenario per game.
4 up, 0 down
Deleted User
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 11:49:52 AM
I also do see how YOU indeed rely on direct insults, calling me ridiculous, elitist, egotistical, among other things.
And again, you go around and around not talking about what defines an RPG. Only to call me names and turning everything into derision when MY definition doesn't fit what YOU believe? All of this, I did without ever calling anyone names or saying people are stupid to believe differently. And you have the nerves afterward to call me egotistic, when in fact, YOU're the one acting all childish when someone doesn't agree with your view by calling them names? I see a lot of irony in what you type, and the way you process what I say.
Is that really the best way you know how to debate your points?
I've never once said that WRPGs are the only ones that could be called RPGs, for example. I said, and I quote: "The WRPG genre, as much as it pains many of you to agree, IS THE CLOSEST we've ever had to a real RPG experience, no matter how boring, bland and monotone you might believe they are."
And then, of course, I went on to explain what I believe defines a RPG.
And there I was saying that the label has been misused all those years, to which you basically agreed to, without ever admitting it directly when you said: "I never provided a definition of role-playing because the "RPG" category of gaming has been messed up for ages. It's chaotic."
So if no one will bring a proper definition to what Role Playing Games are, then why don't you accept that someone will offer one? I'm not imposing it on you, you're entirely free to believe whatever game genre should fit whatever game you look at.
I think you may not take the time to read what I write, and seem to be a tad bit too eager to dismiss anything that might contradict what your beloved game series (which is also my favorite, as I stated before) should be seen as.
But if you want to keep going into this "derision" route, then allow me to say that the only game genre that exist is the RPG genre. You're always in the role of some character or something. So yeah, Gran Turismo is a Role Playing Game, Super Mario Bros is a Role Playing Game, heck, one could find the way to call Tetris a Role Playing Game if he really wanted.
Your last paragraph certainly seem to abide to this train of thought.
So now, because I can label things differently than you, I'm egotistical... Well, you're basically just telling me not to believe what I do. Or share them, since they contradict yours. How ironic is it, eh?
Last edited by n/a on 5/14/2010 11:54:46 AM
3 up, 3 down
Deleted User
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 12:00:56 PM
So yes, you will have to put "to me" at the beginning of most of my sentences.
I'm talking for myself, not for anyone else.
¬_¬
@Highlander, except for the closed minded jab, I appreciate the civil tone of your debating method.
I'm fully aware of what the labels are and why they are used. As I said, I wouldn't hope to change their established places. But I see those RPG elements (from the original meaning of the expression) more in the WRPG (more open-ended, thus giving the player more liberties, which is a staple of the genre when you understand where I'm coming from) than in the more linear and restrictive JRPG ones.
And stating that WRPGs aren't as story driven as the JRPGs is a misconception. Games like Mass Effect, Dragon Age and Fallout 3 offer intricate stories. The difference resides more in the presentation of that story (a lot of which is presented through dialog and action choices instead of heavy cut-scenes) than in the amount of story elements.
Last edited by n/a on 5/14/2010 12:10:53 PM
4 up, 2 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 12:06:03 PM
Last edited by WorldEndsWithMe on 5/14/2010 12:06:51 PM
4 up, 0 down
Highlander
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 12:25:51 PM
I do think we will never agree here. I do have to repeat one thought though. In your posts you seem to be attempting to redefine the RPG genre according to your own personal rules. I honestly don't think you can do that. Sure you can have your opinion as to what an RPG is, just as we all can, but in practice the RPG genre of games has existed for decades and encompasses many different types and styles of role playing game, both video game and non-video game. I do think that imposing your personal definition that restricts RPGs to those where you create your character from scratch narrows the RPG category considerably - which is why I think it is narrow minded if you will. At the same time you seem to not accept the merits of any points raised, which is where my impression that you are a bit closed on the subject of RPGs comes from.
The only point here for me is that a role playing game is a game in which you play the role of a character. Nothing in that says that you must be the character or that you must custom create that character. Nor does it say that to be an RPG a video game must be first person or open world or sand box or anything like that. RPG is a very broad definition that in the world of video games has been further divided into several sub-genre. JRPG, WRPG, SRPG, TRPG, MMORPG and so on. Whether you or I like it or not those genre are well defined and exist. Arguing otherwise is like trying to convince the tides not to rise.
4 up, 1 down
Underdog15
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 1:01:41 PM
2) I don't buy that IMO disclaimer. Sounded to me like you're pretty driven to make your point law and belittle those who disagree. Just because you fail to have enough tact to enunciate what is mere opinion compared to your own lobbying for mandates, doesn't mean anyone is less intelligent for having shockingly assumed you were talking about you think is truth instead of mere opinion.
3) Still waiting to hear about a game that fits your definition.
4) I don't rely on direct insults. They were merely the only appropriate thing to say to you at the time. In MY opinion, the feeling of being insulted is merely your perception of what was said. I was not insulted by you because my perception of what you said was just silliness. 'Cause... you were egotistical... you were elitist and ridiculous... among other things. Chances are, you felt insulted because points were made well against your case. I don't buy that half-buttocked niceness in comments as some sort of apology we should take to forgive such bigotry.
It's true though, what you say, that you were not insulting in the least. Just really really annoying with the be-all end-all opinion on RPG. We're arguing for openness and acceptance of different people's perception of RPG. Not a concrete definition.
Bring on the downvotes. Video gaming is a culture all of it's own, and I get really ticked off about cultural snobbery of any form. People play what they love, and it should stay that way. I don't care in this case about downvotes. I feel very strongly about my stance against having culture mandated to me.
Last edited by Underdog15 on 5/14/2010 1:17:32 PM
3 up, 3 down
Underdog15
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 1:32:07 PM
Every healthy human psyche should be good enough to be able to place yourself in someone else's shoes and relate at least to their emotion, if not their direct life experiences.
Just addressing your argument about the impossibility of relating to a group of characters in a game like FF7. Were you not able to feel hatred towards Sephiroth? Or Barrett's sadness towards losing his wife, fellow avalanche members, or Dyne? Could you not understand Aerith's devotion to friends and family or the her loving disposition? Do you not understand the psychological trauma Cloud must have gone through to set up mental blockades about his past? Or the tragedy Zack and Vincent faced? Does Tifa's love of a specific person not ring true in your life at all?
I think you just like to control things. I'm not sure the lack of ability to appreciate a story in a JRPG is healthy. Do books, theatre, and good movies not move you either? How cold that must feel...
I just don't understand how you can argue that these games don't allow you to immerse yourself into the roles of these characters.
Last edited by Underdog15 on 5/14/2010 1:35:16 PM
3 up, 4 down
Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 2:07:59 PM
You came in here with a lecturing tone, attempting to "teach" everyone - who have likely been playing games as long if not longer than you - about your own definition, attempting to prove it as fact. One minute you say it's your belief and the next minute you say everyone is wrong about how they perceive an RPG. It's called hypocrisy.
Then, you blatantly insult me by implying I don't even recognize what I typed. I never once said you were wrong; I never once said I was right. I don't care how FF is labeled and nobody is "butthurt" about anything. The only thing that annoys me is your lecturing, "I know more than you" tone, which isn't backed up with anything that even remotely resembles rational thought. You keep contradicting yourself and now that all the holes in your argument have been exposed by just about everyone here, you've downshifted to defending yourself that it's "only opinion"...again, with nothing real to talk about.
Why don't you take up the challenge of naming a game you perceive to be an RPG, so we can all use your own definition to tear it apart? If you're afraid of that, you should be. Nobody here has attempted to define the RPG because no, we're not as egotistical as you. All we're trying to do is show you that you, God forbid, may not be right.
I'd advise you not to make another post. You knew your initial comment would only cause problems and you did it anyway. You started it and the tone was hardly conducive to anything "IMO"-related. It should be enough that your theory has been utterly destroyed; have the dignity to stay quiet.
Last edited by Ben Dutka PSXE on 5/14/2010 2:09:35 PM
3 up, 4 down
Deleted User [Administrator]
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 2:55:06 PM
I mention the need for Choices, and Liberties, resulting in outcomes that may be altered by those.
That you play semantics on my explanation and feel like you are winning something out of it is entirely up to you, no matter how ironically egotistical it is of you to do so.
I already mentioned games that, as I said, come closest to what I believe is a Role Playing game. If you'd take the time to read what I type, instead of jumping on the defensive as if I'm destroying your favorite kind of game (which, again, is mine too), then you would have noticed them.
I even mentioned Chrono Trigger as a nice early step by the Japanese developers. Something you seem to have completely missed.
I also agreed that the established labels were not going to change and that it wasn't my intention to do so either.
It looks to me like the issue you have here has nothing to do with me seemingly lecturing anyone here, but is in fact, like most people who jump at Erickson's throat, that the games you so love aren't seen as the same thing by everyone around the world.
Somehow, in Erickson's claim, you seem to believe that the guy downplays the quality of those games by making those inoffensive claims.
I happen to think similarly to him. I fully expected people to argue over and disagree with my stance, the same as I expected them to jump at Erickson's throat. Because many of you get over-sensitive over such petty things like that.
For all I know, I'm from the generation that grew up playing on the Atari and Coleco in the early 80s. Which, from what I gather, is about the same generation as yours. Bringing that point in the first place isn't adding anything to favor either of us, and is kind of a childish argument to be honest. ^_-
In any case, the fact that everyone is having such a hard time to pinpoint what exactly warrants the RPG label speaks for itself.
3 up, 1 down
Underdog15
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 3:35:16 PM
Dude, we didn't miss the Crono thinggy. It actually supports our stance. I figured you were trying to relate to us a bit better.
I mentioned before to read Kraygen's post. It's great. Really. And it won't insult you or anyone. So please don't consider that reference to his post an attack. I just feel it gives a really good picture of the video game understanding of the RPG.
Also, I didn't get sensitive to Erikson. I had an issue with what YOU said. All my posts are directed at you... not Erikson. It's just really funny how your argument is moving closer to the center of neutrality after all of this. You didn't insult my favorite game. You didn't make me feel like my opinion is worthless. You didn't make me feel like less of an individual. In fact, I think you're missing our issue altogether.
My issue was, as Ben said, your attempt to make claim that only you know the true definition of RPG due to your /sarcasm/ vast /sarcasm/ experience. Like I said before, I don't appreciate someone coming in with the "I have it all figured out" mentality to promote their own agenda. That communistic approach is annoying and reeks of a first year undergraduate student (not implying that's what you are... just saying that's what you can expect them to do.)
Lastly, your disclaimer that you've somehow mentioned games that fit your description is bogus. You loosely referred to a few games here and there, but you made no concrete claims.
Anywho, that is all.
2 up, 3 down
Deleted User
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 4:30:03 PM
The issue you have isn't with what I said then, but with HOW I said them. I excused myself for my direct "tone" a few post ago. You are free to accept them or not.
And I'm not neutral. I understand the labeling of those games and don't really think the need to change them due to how long they've been in use, and have had this stance from the start. I still think it's erroneous to label those as such.
My stance in this whole "controversy" has been the same from post one.
And this "experience" you speak of has never once been mentioned as an argument in my comments. It was only sent back to Ben after he mentioned it in the first place. And I even said it was a childish argument at best. ;)
2 up, 1 down
Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 8:37:09 PM
You can back-pedal as fast as you like. Doesn't erase your original post:
"The RPG term has been misused by Japanese developers, who thought that levels and stats were the only thing that were important to warrant such a label.
When in fact, of course a RPG is about playing a role. You can't play a role if every single thing in the game is dictated by the story without ever giving the player so much of a choice to influence the outcome.
The WRPG genre, as much as it pains many of you to agree, is the closest we've ever had to a real RPG experience, no matter how boring, bland and monotone you might believe they are."
This flies directly in the face of your recent post, which stated, "all I said was what it meant to me." Obviously, that's crap. Your first post uses the phrase, "the fact is," you say Japanese RPG makers have misused the term, and you further insult the intelligence of everyone else by OBVIOUSLY implying we're all "butthurt" by FF being involved, and we don't really know what we're talking about.
But really. Back-pedal as fast as you like. It only proves my original point regarding your ORIGINAL TONE. So, don't...do it...again.
1 up, 2 down
Deleted User [Administrator]
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 8:59:54 PM
That much is a fact, yes. How could they be called ROLE playing games otherwise?
"The WRPG genre, as much as it pains many of you to agree, is the closest we've ever had to a real RPG experience, no matter how boring, bland and monotone you might believe they are."
After I've been required to explain myself on that point, I think you're grasping at straws here. You suggest it yourself in your article:
"It's an argument that just doesn't die, but we will say that the more you give "choice" to the player, the less you can focus on a cohesive, engaging story. At some point, you get to a position where there is no story; just a lot of wandering around on the part of the player. That may be "true" role-playing but...well, it's not worth getting into, is it?"
Finally, you're also basically suggesting that games like Oblivion, Fallout 3, Fable 2 and to some extent Mass Effect and Dragon Age: Origins aren't worth getting into... Just because they're not interactive movies intertwined with corridors in which you control the characters to reach the next story episode?
In any case, my tone appeared to be pushy to some and I'm sorry for this.
I still stand by my stance.
Last edited by n/a on 5/14/2010 9:00:40 PM
4 up, 1 down
Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 9:59:52 PM
Maybe you can figure that out on your own.
0 up, 4 down
Scarecrow
Thursday, May 13, 2010 @ 11:47:32 PM
Reply
wrpg = 'wack' rpg
See Erickson, do your research
Bioware's garbage. Thankfully, I never got Dragon Age
8 up, 8 down
WolfCrimson
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 2:29:43 AM
0 up, 0 down
johnld
Thursday, May 13, 2010 @ 11:50:21 PM
Reply
4 up, 2 down
Mr Bitey
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 12:23:20 AM
Reply
Also considering Bioware thinks 3rd person shooters with cover mechanics are RPGs. According to Bioware's standards Uncharted and Gears of War are also RPGs.
3 up, 3 down
Snaaaake
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 12:38:01 AM
Reply
2 up, 0 down
FlyingKickPunch
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 3:29:13 PM
0 up, 0 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 1:06:51 AM
Reply
WKC gets around this pretty good by letting you create a character in game that you use in the adventure and online, but he/she still says nothing during the adventure. I kinda hope they add a personality to the custom character in WKC2. Maybe let you pick their attitude and let that play out. Doubt it'll happen though or we'd have heard of it.
Last edited by WorldEndsWithMe on 5/14/2010 1:07:32 AM
4 up, 0 down
SmokeyPSD
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 1:48:46 AM
2 up, 2 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 12:07:51 PM
0 up, 0 down
CHAOS THEORY X
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 1:10:21 AM
Reply
"Dragon Age: Origins delivers a focused, single-player RPG experience. Since this is the first game set in the world of Dragon Age, the team wanted to concentrate on a single player experience that would allow the players to learn the incredible history, story, and lore in the game."
http://dragonage.bioware.com/game/faq/#1.01
sounds like a final fantasy.
its also list under their RPG games, which are questionable http://dragonage.bioware.com/game/faq/#1.01
2 up, 2 down
SmokeyPSD
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 1:47:05 AM
In 2nd place is Valkryia Chronicles aswell, everything else, crap, really. Especially FFXIII I completely agree with him on. older ones, maybe no, FFX sure.
0 up, 3 down
CHAOS THEORY X
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 2:57:02 AM
0 up, 1 down
Temjin001
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 1:29:33 AM
Reply
2 up, 0 down
SmokeyPSD
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 1:44:13 AM
Reply
0 up, 1 down
SmokeyPSD
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 1:51:34 AM
Reply
I WANT them to make an RPG, like they used to, with characters that I do live. I just dont care at all for the entire world, least of which the chracters of XIII
2 up, 1 down
Vitron
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 2:05:39 AM
2 up, 1 down
piratedrunk
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 2:13:47 AM
1 up, 1 down
___________
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 2:30:35 AM
Reply
if he was to say FFXIII is not a JRPG, or not a true FF game than ok id agree, and at least its not completley outrageous.
but not a RPG at all?????????????
only thing i hate about RPGs is there so tedious at times, you have to sink so many hours into them just to progress 1% in the game.
i know thats the point of a RPG, thats what makes them so great but at times i just want to get into a game finish it and move on.
like nier, i truly enjoyed that game so much, but it had so much go fetch x amounts of this missions it got really annoying.
all you do throughout the whole game is fetch ingredients to make new weapons, or for medicine to cure your daughter.
what am i, a freaking dog!?
at times i like to rush through a game get it finished than go back and do all the side missions and sightseeing, thats what i did with fallout 3, just cause 2, infamous, mass effect.
there just way to tedious for me, if im playing a game for 4 hours and feel like im not getting anywhere than im going to get bored and move on.
Last edited by ___________ on 5/14/2010 2:34:33 AM
1 up, 3 down
Ergi
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 2:48:05 AM
Reply
I'm an avid RPG player and I can't really define what an RPG is. But to me it's a game where you have at least some say in the development of the character, not necessarily the story. When I can choose what weapons/items to use, skills to learn and level-up(get stronger) during the game it's an RPG or at least it has RPG-elements.
Nowadays however, these elements can be in any game, genres are being mixed and other genres are created.
2 up, 2 down
kraygen
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 2:53:03 AM
Reply
With FF7 you play as cloud. You level him and his friends up by doing combat. You choose who is in your party, what weapon of their type they will use, what magic they will use, and even make decisions about their personal lives. In the end tho, a story is told and the game ends in pretty much the same way. Some of us may have completed some things on the side that others didn't but we all played the role of cloud and friends as we traversed thru the story.
As for dragon age, you play as a character. You level that character and his/her friends up by doing combat. You choose who is in your party, what weapon of their type they will use, what magic they will use, and even make decisions about their personal lives. In the end tho, a story is told and the game ends in pretty much the same way. Some of us may have completed some things on the side that others didn't but we all played the role of a character and friends as we traversed thru the story.
In dragon age you design the way your character looks and the beginning starts with a mini side quest type story, but there are only 5 options which are all technically starter side quests. Just because you choose your characters name, the way they look, and a few things they say along the way doesn't change how the game plays out. At the end you fight the boss, the boss dies, and the game is over.
It seems to me everyone is getting upset over nothing. If one guy chooses to call his game something different from another I guess we all have our own opinions, but in the end one persons claims about what genre a game is shouldn't matter. Some people think xbox is better than ps3, whatever, I know how I feel about it and that's good enough for me.
19 up, 0 down
Vitron
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 3:06:44 AM
3 up, 0 down
Dante399
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 3:36:03 AM
Reply
2 up, 0 down
Lotusflow3r
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 4:40:30 AM
Reply
Wait, an american developer creating Japanese games is saying that the Japanese got it wrong?
ah dear. I think most people would tell them that their RPGs lack half the depth of a Japanese RPG.
Way to lose yourself.
4 up, 4 down
LightShow
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 6:51:52 AM
Reply
in a game where the character doesnt talk much if at all, i feel like an extension of me s in the game. to me, it can be a fps, jrpg, kart racer, i dont care. theyre all role playing games to me.
however i realize not everyone has the imagination i do.
just because the guys who have been doing it for 25 years have decided to do it in largely the same way, it doesnt mean you can redefine a genre. you may be current, but terms are defined just as much (or even more by) the past than whats happening now.
2 up, 1 down
Athrin
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 6:57:50 AM
Reply
3 up, 2 down
Kiri
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 7:39:57 AM
Reply
So what? Seriously...
I could call God Of War a flight simulator but would it stop you from bying it???
This statement isn't controversial... It isn't even news worthy because (and i kinda hope i'm not the only one who thinks like this) as far as i'm concerned no matter what genre jrpgs really are, it's my favorite...
1 up, 0 down
Underdog15
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 10:48:14 AM
Heavy Rain didn't even HAVE a genre to belong to...
0 up, 1 down
Gabriel013
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 7:48:17 AM
Reply
Those which provide a preset character model unchangeable at game start through multiple playthroughs BUT allows you to modify stats as the game progresses are more like Modern RPG's
CRPG's and MRPG's both have their own merits and flaws but can be equally enjoyable.
2 up, 0 down
Jordahn
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 8:20:55 AM
Reply
1 up, 1 down
mustang750r
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 9:21:50 AM
Reply
I couldn't resist lol
Last edited by mustang750r on 5/14/2010 9:22:23 AM
3 up, 0 down
DeathOfChaos
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 10:09:36 AM
Reply
JRPG = Japanese Role Playing Game.
Role Playing Game is when you take a role of a character and play and experience a story as a character or set of characters. (Not to mention that the Japanese CREATED the RPG) The J is put in front of it because other people started making RPGs, and now, BioWare is left looking kind of racist actually. They have never made an RPG that I can consider a real RPG, anyway.
Last edited by DeathOfChaos on 5/14/2010 10:10:11 AM
2 up, 4 down
SirLoin of Beef
Monday, May 17, 2010 @ 2:18:43 PM
Seriously?
0 up, 0 down
Fane1024
Saturday, May 22, 2010 @ 2:55:06 PM
Ummm...no, they didn't. Gary Gygax (et al.) did, which is the whole point of this article.
Do all of you who are defending the JRPG actually believe the JRPG came first?
Last edited by Fane1024 on 5/22/2010 2:58:41 PM
0 up, 0 down
ValdiPS3
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 10:30:37 AM
Reply
0 up, 1 down
telly
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 11:17:54 AM
Reply
0 up, 1 down
maxpontiac
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 11:19:22 AM
Reply
Bioware is one of my favorites too. I am on my 2nd play through of Dragon Age, and have 82% of trophies. I really like the way they design RPG's.
Anyways, there is more then one way to skin a cat.
0 up, 0 down
Alienange
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 3:04:41 PM
Reply
Gamers everywhere should be on their knees thanking Square, Bioware, Bethesda and Level-5 for giving us some of the greatest games of this generation.
1 up, 0 down
Hawkeye
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 3:41:17 PM
I would ask you, do you think intellectuals only talk about transubstantiation? Intellectuals will discuss anything and everything. That includes comparing games, whether they be computer or pen and paper or between both. These are games and regardless we can, and should, be able to compare and contrast them all.
I would ask though, why are RPG's from Japan put into a sub-genre of JRPG's? Is it only because of where they are made? Or is it perhaps much deeper? When I lived in Japan for two years I never saw any WRPG style games for sale in Japan. Why, because the Japanese will take something, change it, adapt it to their sensibilities and make it their own. Thus making a new type of game. WRPG's just don't appeal as much to the Japanese, and that's fine.
My personal tastes tend to more open game style RPG's rather than strict linear kinds. There's still a story, but there's more freedom. And for that reason I believe JRPG's are less like the pen and paper kind than WRPG's.
My bias is that I played the pen and paper kind of RPG, Warhammer mostly, and that's where I get my definition of RPG from.
Last edited by Hawkeye on 5/14/2010 3:46:04 PM
2 up, 0 down
Deleted User
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 4:31:48 PM
0 up, 0 down
Shams
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 5:31:15 PM
Reply
When i was playing ME2, it felt more like a cross between GTA4 and R&C than anything particularly RPG'ish. I still thoroughly enjoyed the experience. I haven't played DA, but as others have noticed, and like Kraygen said, it seems more like FF, than not.
Genres are really just loose labels to help us discuss and (make frames of reference for comparison, evaluation and purchase). So it kind of defeats the purpose to split hairs over them, especially when games are increasingly evolving and defying these said genres.
1 up, 1 down
Gordo
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 5:54:52 PM
Reply
Obviously there is a place for both JRPG and WRPG's. It's all a matter of perspective.
Do you want the attractive cutscenes, the melodrama and the "turn" based (yes I even think the paradigm battles in FFXIII are basically turn based), or do you want more gritty realism, molding characters (which reduces cutscenes)guns/swords and more "real time" action like Oblivion.
Room for both I think. They still have a RPG root just adapting differently for the HD gaming platforms.
Sometimes you want to get swept away with a story and othertimes you want to use your imagination a bit more.
I think imagination is pretty important. We are all losing that spark that allows us to approach and interact with games differently to each other.
No two gamers should have the exact same experience with a game. It should affect everyone differently.
The role in RPG is what you make it.
1 up, 0 down
Kangasfwa
Friday, May 14, 2010 @ 8:03:05 PM
Reply
2 up, 0 down
Highlander
Saturday, May 15, 2010 @ 2:02:51 AM
We're Bioware, and we're great, so what we say goes, and any of you that disagree are puffy eyed mouth breathers.
2 up, 1 down
SirLoin of Beef
Monday, May 17, 2010 @ 2:24:44 PM
Yes, I can see where the writing director saying he didn't think FF XIII was an RPG would come across as that.
0 up, 0 down
TheTenth
Saturday, May 15, 2010 @ 6:57:59 PM
Reply
Now in all kinds of games you have RPG elements : FPS, with upgrading capacities, weaponry and armor, racers, with tuning card and getting new ones, Golf, with bettering your capacities and buying new equipment ... but they're not RPGs!!!
JRPG, with the turn based system allows infinitely more possibilities (such as 20 spells, 20 special attacks, 100 different items,...) allowing each player to develop his team and their powers, and to fully control all characters so that each action is important.
OK that is before FFXIII happened and killed the license and the genre with gameplay for noobs, and a negligible levelling system.
I found it utterly cumbersome the DA: O system where you fight in real time mashing buttons, pause to cast some specific spells, change to another character to use items ... then come back to real time battle.
They just did an evolution of a sub-genre that doesn't give half the fun of the first Diablo or Darkstone.
Last edited by TheTenth on 5/15/2010 6:59:36 PM
1 up, 4 down
Jotun
Sunday, May 16, 2010 @ 12:01:10 AM
Reply
The addition of nothing BUT choice in WRPGS such as The Elder Scrolls series, DA:O, or Fallout 3 have made for some of the lamest and depthless storylines I've played in my 23+ years of rpg gaming.
JRPGs will always be my favirote, but I love WRPGs that give us a deep, well written, character-driven story just as much. There is a very short list of WRPGs that do this though including titles such as Mass Effect, The Witcher(not western technically, but the style of gameplay is), or older titles such as Arcanum and Betrayel at Krondor. The old Fallout was a perfect example as well, but the story took much more of a focus than the barelly represented one in Fallout 3.
RPG, taken literally from a D&D perspective, does not represent JRPGs, but that isn't the real definition of an RPG. Choice doesn't define an "RPG".
To take a role is simply to be taken into the character, to see the world through the characters eyes, not to necassarily drive the storyline through your choices. You're meant to play as *a character* in *their* story, playing the role. Technically, almost any videogame with an involved plotline is an RPG.
The point is, grow up Bioware. You've had some great rpgs, but just because you feel threatened by having to share your market with the resurgance of interest in the JRPG that a Final Fantasy title always brings, doesn't mean you have the right to bash them.
Personally I loved Bioware until this statement, now this guy makes them sound like Cliffy B or the creator of Fable or any number of arrogant designers our there.
Last edited by Jotun on 5/16/2010 12:05:13 AM
0 up, 3 down
sha4dowknight05
Sunday, May 16, 2010 @ 2:20:26 PM
Reply
1 up, 0 down
SirLoin of Beef
Monday, May 17, 2010 @ 2:48:12 PM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
Highlander
Monday, May 17, 2010 @ 4:39:28 PM
Is there anything else we can say about him?
0 up, 0 down
SirLoin of Beef
Monday, May 17, 2010 @ 5:43:56 PM
0 up, 0 down
Vitron
Reply
Thursday, May 13, 2010 @ 9:41:48 PM