Bioware Writer: JRPGs are not RPGs

[shopkins]

Oh yeah. He said that shit. What do you think about it?

------
http://www.strategyinformer.com/news...13-isnt-an-rpg

Talking with Strategy Informer about the upcoming release of Star Wars: The Old Republic, Daniel Erickson, Writing Director for Bioware said that Final Fantasy XIII isn't an RPG. This was in reply to a question about the main staple of The Old Republic being its story, and how the game might be affected without good game play to support it, much like Final Fantasy XIII was.

"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." said Erickson.

------

As someone who has been playing JRPGs since Dragon Warrior, has completed dozens of them, has enjoyed them immensely, who has more than a hundred easily in his collection but still drools at the pics of more accomplished collections posted here, and who still regularly buys new ones...

I agree. They can be great games and a lot of fun but they're for the most part misnamed. JRPGs combine stats, visual novel storytelling and adventure elements in a wonderful stew, but somebody decades ago looked at them and saw superficial resemblances to Dungeons and Dragons and now we're stuck with the inaccurate name.

[kupomogli]

I don't mind the term RPG to describe a JRPG. Besides, you do have some sort of customization on the majority of them. It's doesn't have as deep of a customization that Western RPGs provide, but it's there.

A lot of western based RPGs I can't really stand though and would rather have even the most straight forward non customizable JRPGs.

Sacred 2 and Diablo 2 own though. My two favorite western RPGs.

[Icarus Moonsight]

He's trollin'

Actor's play roles... Most of them have no say about the specifics of the character they play to the degree he draws. They do have some ability of expression, choice and control through their action in and portrayal of that role however. It's semantic quibbling.

[Hari Seldon]

I think he was pissed that the guy doing the interview likes FFXIII. His response was a polite way of saying "You are comparing us to Square? Fuck Square!"

[Bojay1997]

He's trollin'

Actor's play roles... Most of them have no say about the specifics of the character they play to the degree he draws. They do have some ability of expression, choice and control through their action in and portrayal of that role however. It's semantic quibbling.

Disagree. As someone who started playing RPGs back in the days of 20 sided dice and written character sheets right through to the modern day, there is nothing about the Japanese style of "RPGs" that resembles a traditional RPGs. For me, a true RPG involves creating a character and having that character progress in ways that are determined by the player throughout the game in ways that are extremely detailed and customizable. Final Fantasy and other Japanese style games involve some limited customization as someone else pointed out, but ultimately, you are stuck playing through a pretty well established framework closely limited by the developer of the game. Having said that, there are many great Japanese "RPGs" but I must agree that they are more akin to adventure games than an RPG.

[FoxNtd]

It's semantic quibbling.

Yeah, that's what I was thinking. I don't see the relevance of the magnitude of the complexity, sophistication, or customization of the characters or decision-making regarding whether the game is role-playing or not. If there is role-playing then the RPG title fits, doesn't matter how much or how little your role goes/can do. Why am I seeing Western RPGs being elected as the only type of game that earns the title? Because it's older? Because that's what we were used to before higher degrees of exposure to Eastern RPGs? Sounds like favoritism and old habits, not logic. If you want to refer specifically to the subgenre of Western RPGs then call them exactly what I just did instead of trying to throw everything else out of the genre illogically.

[Rogue]

I think he was pissed that the guy doing the interview likes FFXIII. His response was a polite way of saying "You are comparing us to Square? Fuck Square!"

Yeah, it's more like that, IMO.

But I don't think that's possible to create specific titles for all kinds of RPGs based on how much they approach to "real"(?) RPGs.

[Bojay1997]

Yeah, that's what I was thinking. I don't see the relevance of the magnitude of the complexity, sophistication, or customization of the characters or decision-making regarding whether the game is role-playing or not. If there is role-playing then the RPG title fits, doesn't matter how much or how little your role goes/can do. Why am I seeing Western RPGs being elected as the only type of game that earns the title? Because it's older? Because that's what we were used to before higher degrees of exposure to Eastern RPGs? Sounds like favoritism and old habits, not logic. If you want to refer specifically to the subgenre of Western RPGs then call them exactly what I just did instead of trying to throw everything else out of the genre illogically.

I think there are such things as RPGs coming out of Japan. Certainly, games like Wizardry which continued to be developed in Japan long after the Western market moved on would be a good example. There are a number of RPGs available on Japanese computers from the 80s and 90s which were developed in Japan. I just agree that what Square and a number of the more prominent companies have been releasing on consoles are not RPGs, but rather adventure games more akin to the Lucasarts games or the King's Quest series with combat and some limited customization thrown in.

[Aussie2B]

Not surprising. There have been D&D fans bitching about Japanese RPGs since the first Dragon Warrior. It's nothing but elitism. All this fussing over the term to begin with is dumb anyway since "role-playing game" is so vague that you can apply it to practically any game, so big whoop if it gets applied to something slightly different from what it was originally used for.

The funny thing is that it's the other way around in my mind. When I see Western RPGs, they usually don't feel like "real" RPGs to me. Unlike the D&D followers who define an RPG by the level of customization and how open-ended the world is, I define RPGs by the gameplay just as I do with practically any other genre of games. And to me, RPG gameplay stems from the Dragon Warrior school of design. Most Western RPGs look like hack & slash action to me, making them more akin to Zelda-style adventure games in my mind. Granted, plenty of Japanese RPGs are getting more active-based gameplay, but they still have some level of structure to them.

But that's just my perspective and I know it's pretty unconventional.

[Andred]

RPGs are a tough genre to define. I don't know that we actually have any RPG video games at all. Dragon Age: Origins is probably the closest thing but even that falls short of the base concept of pen & paper RPGs which is about creating a story as a character. JRPGs and western RPGs are not much more RPG-like than movies or choose your own adventure books even though you're meant to identify with those characters. Adventure Game is probably a more accurate title for all of them.

[Bojay1997]

RPGs are a tough genre to define. I don't know that we actually have any RPG video games at all. Dragon Age: Origins is probably the closest thing but even that falls short of the base concept of pen & paper RPGs which is about creating a story as a character. JRPGs and western RPGs are not much more RPG-like than movies or choose your own adventure books even though you're meant to identify with those characters. Adventure Game is probably a more accurate title for all of them.

You might be right about that. Certainly, not on consoles anyway. I think there have been a number of computer games that have come much, much closer to traditional RPGs. MMOs certainly seem to get pretty close when well done.

[Kitsune Sniper]

...

Bioware games aren't RPGs either. They're action games. :P

[Kid Fenris]

http://kidfenris.com/semantic.png

[Gameguy]

I just agree that what Square and a number of the more prominent companies have been releasing on consoles are not RPGs, but rather adventure games more akin to the Lucasarts games or the King's Quest series with combat and some limited customization thrown in.
I consider that an insult to actual adventure games, they don't have pointless grinding or combat like RPGs do(the crappier adventure games have arcade sequences as filler but they're pretty much separate from the rest of the game). The only thing they really have in common is that they're heavily focused on the story.

[retroman]

For me rpgs are dragon quest type games..not so action like.

[Bojay1997]

I consider that an insult to actual adventure games, they don't have pointless grinding or combat like RPGs do(the crappier adventure games have arcade sequences as filler but they're pretty much separate from the rest of the game). The only thing they really have in common is that they're heavily focused on the story.

Not only are they heavily focused on the story, but rather on a very specific narrative thread throughout the game which, although you can take some minor detours, you can't ever really avoid the major story points and in many cases, the lengthy cut scenes. As such, I don't think JRPGs differ much at all from traditional adventure games.

[maxlords]

Technically....wouldn't ALL video games be RPGs then? If the purpose is to PLAY A ROLE and IMMERSE YOURSELF IN THE CHARACTER, then that could easily be applied to an FPS just as much as an RPG or JRPG. Realistically, the only difference is that you don't create your own character...in SOME action games. But as for a game like an FPS, what you decide to do DIRECTLY affects the game and changes the outcome. Come around the wrong corner guns a'blazin' and you get obliterated.

We've simply come to accept the terminology of "RPG" for a traditional JRPG and that term NOW has meaning of a story based game with menu driven battles and customizable character options. That's something we've all done as gamers and accepted for decades...it's part of gaming canon now, regardless of the origins of the terminology or whether or not some douche at Bioware things that the term is apt.

Conceptually, I don't see the difference between sitting there rolling the dice and praying that the enemy doesn't get a natural 20 and having a computer grind the AI algorithm and decide that the enemy kills you. Instead of telling your DM (dungeon master for the uninitiated) that you come running around the corner and your DM tells you what happens, you instead input your thoughts as reactions on a controller. In ANY game YOU are in control of the character(s) in the game, therefore making ANY game with characters you control a role playing game.

Just saying...

[mobiusclimber]

^ That. I can't believe I read the first post, started scrolling down, barely reading anything, waiting to post EXACTLY THOSE THOUGHTS. Thanks, Maxlords! :)

And, actually, I think most action games nowadays are more "play a role" than many RPGs, in that you actually do get to choose your character, in many you change the looks entirely by choosing from preset hair, eyes, mouths, etc etc. How many games have a "create a character" feature. I mean, really, that would make most wrestling games RPGs.

I think Bioware sucks, frankly, if you want another controversial opinion. I don't think they've released a single RPG, either. Games like Mass Effect or whatever are actually FPS games, not RPGs. Dumbass is just trying to justify releasing shitty FPS games over and over by calling them RPGs and making a big deal about it. And oh yeah GET BACK ON THE DAMN PC WHERE YOUR SHITTY GAMES BELONG!

Sorry, had to rant.

[j_factor]

Not only are they heavily focused on the story, but rather on a very specific narrative thread throughout the game which, although you can take some minor detours, you can't ever really avoid the major story points and in many cases, the lengthy cut scenes. As such, I don't think JRPGs differ much at all from traditional adventure games.

I don't think many adventure game fans would agree with you.

There are both linear adventure games and ones that are more freewheeling (such as The Last Express). This is also true of RPGs. That aspect doesn't define the genre unless you radically redefine everything.

Adventure games have no combat, or some combat in some cases, but it's not the emphasis of the game. They never have a fleshed-out combat system with statistics, equipment, spells, experience, etc. Adventure games typically have no use for statistics such as attack power, defense, agility, HP, MP, and so on, or the raising of such. Adventure games rarely have boss fights. Adventure games are driven by puzzle-solving, exploration, character interaction (dialog), and/or item manipulation.

Bottom line, RPG combat = RPG, IMO. Final Fantasy has more in common with Diablo than it does with Sam & Max.

[ubersaurus]

Not surprising. There have been D&D fans bitching about Japanese RPGs since the first Dragon Warrior. It's nothing but elitism. All this fussing over the term to begin with is dumb anyway since "role-playing game" is so vague that you can apply it to practically any game, so big whoop if it gets applied to something slightly different from what it was originally used for.

The funny thing is that it's the other way around in my mind. When I see Western RPGs, they usually don't feel like "real" RPGs to me. Unlike the D&D followers who define an RPG by the level of customization and how open-ended the world is, I define RPGs by the gameplay just as I do with practically any other genre of games. And to me, RPG gameplay stems from the Dragon Warrior school of design. Most Western RPGs look like hack & slash action to me, making them more akin to Zelda-style adventure games in my mind. Granted, plenty of Japanese RPGs are getting more active-based gameplay, but they still have some level of structure to them.

But that's just my perspective and I know it's pretty unconventional.

I don't think it's elitism at all.

You play the role in a role playing game. In most JRPGs, or other games like even Mario or Mega Man, you're just playing the character. Yes, there is a difference, a huge one. When you're role playing, you're making decisions, and you deal with the consequences of those, and I don't just mean statwise. How you reach major plot points and what happens because of your actions there affect the game, and that's something few JRPGs do. In Mario, for example, everything is laid out ahead of you, and you're just jumping your way through. There's no decision other than what power up you want to grab; you don't get an option to let Koopa do his thing... Mario has his goal, and you are just controlling him as he gets to it. Same with Cloud in FF7.

They have the stats, but they ARE linear stories that you effectively walk through. That isn't necessarily bad, but I can see why he'd want to make the distinction. The best example of a JRPG I can think of that doesn't take the usual tack is Chrono Trigger, and even that is only sort of halfway there (mainly, it involves the Magus decision.) Trying to compare something like Final Fantasy 13 to a Bioware game or Starflight is comparing apples and oranges. Yeah, they're both fruit, but that's about it.

[mobiusclimber]

I don't think it's elitism at all.

You play the role in a role playing game. In most JRPGs, or other games like even Mario or Mega Man, you're just playing the character. Yes, there is a difference, a huge one. When you're role playing, you're making decisions, and you deal with the consequences of those, and I don't just mean statwise. How you reach major plot points and what happens because of your actions there affect the game, and that's something few JRPGs do. In Mario, for example, everything is laid out ahead of you, and you're just jumping your way through. There's no decision other than what power up you want to grab; you don't get an option to let Koopa do his thing... Mario has his goal, and you are just controlling him as he gets to it. Same with Cloud in FF7.

They have the stats, but they ARE linear stories that you effectively walk through. That isn't necessarily bad, but I can see why he'd want to make the distinction. The best example of a JRPG I can think of that doesn't take the usual tack is Chrono Trigger, and even that is only sort of halfway there (mainly, it involves the Magus decision.) Trying to compare something like Final Fantasy 13 to a Bioware game or Starflight is comparing apples and oranges. Yeah, they're both fruit, but that's about it.

But is that really what an RPG is? I think you AND the Bioware guy are just getting hung up on the words "role playing" rather than actually getting into what makes an RPG. Whether an RPG is linear or not doesn't change that both are RPGs. Creating a character doesn't make a game an RPG, making decisions in a game that affect how the game plays out doesn't make it an RPG. In fact, those things have just about nothing to do w/ whether a game is an RPG or not.

[Famidrive-16]

and yet Bioware made that Sonic RPG, lol

[j_factor]

But is that really what an RPG is? I think you AND the Bioware guy are just getting hung up on the words "role playing" rather than actually getting into what makes an RPG. Whether an RPG is linear or not doesn't change that both are RPGs. Creating a character doesn't make a game an RPG, making decisions in a game that affect how the game plays out doesn't make it an RPG. In fact, those things have just about nothing to do w/ whether a game is an RPG or not.

Yeah. Depending on how you play it, some games of D&D are pretty "linear" and tightly controlled by the DM, with little decision-making on the part of the players. Ultima III is mostly linear too; the game kind of lets you go anywhere but you have to do things in order. I guess Ultima III is not an RPG by the OP's definition.

To me, "decision-making" does not a genre make. The Colonel's Bequest (which is a great game) is pretty nonlinear; it's a murder mystery, and the player has a lot of choices as to who to talk to, when, what to say, and where to go (albeit within a small environment), with the plot of the game depending on these player choices. However, it's still an adventure game, and no less or more of one than anything else in the genre. It's just done in a different way.

In any case, even if the "story" is fixed, the game can still offer freedom of choice in other ways. In Saga Frontier for example, you're mostly free to roam, and most of the game is optional quests; however, you don't get to change the actual plot. In Dragon Force, you move along a predetermined path and the plot is fixed, but your choices (and performance) affect how the game plays out in other ways.

Is plot even really a necessary component? A lot of western RPGs don't really have "major plot points"; there's an intro and an endgame but everything in between is just doing whatever quests. Going through dungeons, collecting treasure, and fighting monsters to raise your stats isn't exactly what I would call storytelling.

[Icarus Moonsight]

Technically....wouldn't ALL video games be RPGs then?

Yuppers. Back to the thought-destructive "Everything and Nothing" premise.

1UP: ... and I was playing an RPG earlier today...

2UP: Oh yeah? Which one?

1UP: Thunderforce IV.

2UP: That's a shooter, not an RPG moron.

1UP: Ho, not so fast. I was playing the role of a spaceship pilot in that game. If you'd rather I say PRG, fine, but then I suggest you go play a JPRG - like Pepsiman, asshole.

[Sothy]

I think of RPG's as Final fantasy1 or dragon warrior1 up to maybe star control2 the recent japanese games "newer final fantasy stuff" needs its own category.... and sucks ass.

Mass effect and its ilk stick more to actual rpg gameplay but still are not the same.


Oh yeah and " LOL PONG IS A RPG BECAUSE IM A FUKIN SHITFACE"

[Gentlegamer]

I'll go farther: no video game is or ever will be an actual role-playing game (unless something like the Holodeck from Star Trek becomes a reality).

However, as far as the genre in the context of video games goes, JRPGs are in fact RPGs.

[Gentlegamer]

Instead of telling your DM (dungeon master for the uninitiated) that you come running around the corner and your DM tells you what happens, you instead input your thoughts as reactions on a controller. In ANY game YOU are in control of the character(s) in the game, therefore making ANY game with characters you control a role playing game.

Just saying...The key difference is that there is no limit to the "input" that you can give to a live Game Master to be adjudicated. The possibilities are endless. That is the heart of what an actual role-playing game is. No video game can be so open ended.

[Ed Oscuro]

haha @ people gettin' trolled

The guy is right, though, there's no actual role-playing in many (not all) of them. It doesn't mean it's bad, or that the tactical adventure game (which is what I think of them as) format is easier.

First off, it's important to remember there's a big difference between being a GAME PLAYER and a GAME CREATOR. The Dungeons & Dragons DMs I have known recently all liked jRPGs. But for creating D&D campaign sessions they had different objectives in mind than when playing a console game. The Bioware guy is speaking from the perspective of needing a more flexible and transparent way of letting his audience see the story from multiple angles, which is one of the holy grails of "interactive" fiction as opposed to movies etc. Some people don't care about making games so different from movies in every respect, though. The standard jRPG format seems to him to be limiting. We all know that there are some jRPGs that give meaningful choices at least at critical points, but an open game like Morrowind or Fallout lets you choose at the very least when to do things.

These game styles tend to embrace different worldviews. From the perspective of a character in a Final Fantasy game, running off to go looking for a bunch of bottle caps in the desert instead of fighting a battle now would be a dereliction of duty and putting the rest of the world in danger. From the perspective of a Fallout character, hitting the final dungeons in the name of "duty" without having explored the rest of the world for helpful items would be foolish and uncertain to achieve the objectives. (Yes, both game types can feature grinding.) In that sense both types of game show restrictions that real people face in real situations; they just deal with them differently. The jRPG stuff tends to be organized, then, more like actual military forces would be; the Western stuff we think of often (not always; this all is an outgrowth of tactical games) has a wider range of choices, including deserting the force, or otherwise doing 'dumb' things.

But it does make a difference. One thing that I see in a lot of "jRPGs" is heavy-handed nihilism. Even Vagrant Story, which is a game I have so far found excellent and with a pretty intelligent story, has its heavy-handed moments (but I didn't care). Some of that is the culture - anti-war, the whole post-Hiroshima thing, the outgrowth of this in manga and anime - but some of it is also an inherent limitation of the format. There's a heavy tendency towards depending on fantasy or being beaten over the head with "rarrrgh yu are make wrong decisions" which is really uncalled for since in these games the player rarely makes any meaningful choices.

FPSes have a lot of this too. The guy from Prey was an idiot and I hope he never gets another game, which is a shame because the setting could be interesting. That's how badly I think we can react to an unsympathetic character. But not all games have this problem: There have been relatively free-roaming FPSes for a long while, and similar types of games like Daggerfall.

Some 'jRPGs' do let you make decisions; this is role-playing. Many don't let you role-play, however. There's nothing wrong with it, except the lessons we learn best are those we actually make. So I guess that games without meaningful choices are inherently mentally crippled.

I usually resent games that try to preach to me. (The FPSes Iron Storm and the Bet On Soldier games are heavily guilty of this.)

[shopkins]

What you say about different mindsets is interesting. When I was playing Shenmue one of the things that annoyed me was that, despite how much freedom I allegedly had with Ryo, I could not make that sucker stay out past his bedtime unless it was plot ordained. His aunt worried so he went home. That conflict between what I wanted to do and what Ryo wanted to do completely broke the illusion that I was the player character for me. Instead I'm just kind of shuffling him around for a while. Like you say, a lot of JRPGs are like that, and for me they make you feel more like you're watching a character than controlling a character. I think that's a strike against them being accurately called role playing games because the role plays out the same regardless of your input.

I like the term Interactive Adventure Novel, because they do have structures similar to novels. Maybe Interactive Tactical Adventure Novel.

[chrisbid]

original computer rpgs (think ultima) relied on player decisions and computerized "dice rolling" to determine the outcome of battle rather than direct action inputs. as far as video games went, this is what separated an RPG from a traditional video game.

dragon warrior simplified the ultima formula a bit for a console audience. but player decisions and indirect actions still determined how the game progressed. unlike the 2D zelda games which featured arcade-like combat and real-time player skill to progress through its story.

since then the line has blurred more and more, "rpgs" have more direct-input combat, and other video games involve more pre-planning, character design, and indirect player decisions. even sports games and shooters now have "rpg elements"

so the arguements today over what game is an rpg and what isnt arent really based on any solid definitions. neither square nor bioware produce games that can be considered a pure computer rpg like ultima.

as for comparisons with table top rpgs, while computer/console games are more open-ended than ever before, they can never be 100% open-ended like a table top rpg. so trying to have one live up to the standards of the other is a complete waste of time. its better to just have "table top rpg influence" rather than a straight up "table top rpg on a console/computer".

[mobiusclimber]

But the fact is, most WRPGs and JRPGs do the same thing: they present you with a storyline that you can follow or go goof off instead. Neither game (generally) will end unless you follow the story to its conclusion. The meteor will NEVER strike Neibelheim no matter how much time you waste with it hanging in the sky. The demons will never overrun the world of Oblivion. In fact, I remember spending a good ten hours just roaming around the countryside in Oblivion, picking flowers and shit. Then I came to an Inn or something and as soon as I got there it was firebombed. THEY WAITED FOR ME. So no, your choices in WRPGs have as much effect as they do in a JRPG. Just having a couple of branching choices is not a real choice.

The fact is JRPGs and WRPGs just have different methods of telling a story. It doesn't make one way right and one way wrong, tho. I generally don't read "choose your own adventure" novels because the story is never as compelling, and how could it be? The writer has to account for so many variations they have no time to fine-tune their craft. I can't say I've played too many Bioware games (or played them for very long), so I don't know how well they are at telling a story. But just b/c you have branching paths or you let the player choose were to go at what time doesn't mean the player is in fact "playing a role" as in "can do whatever they like." Cuz I'd run around naked peeing on people in a video game IF I COULD.

[j_factor]

What you say about different mindsets is interesting. When I was playing Shenmue one of the things that annoyed me was that, despite how much freedom I allegedly had with Ryo, I could not make that sucker stay out past his bedtime unless it was plot ordained. His aunt worried so he went home. That conflict between what I wanted to do and what Ryo wanted to do completely broke the illusion that I was the player character for me. Instead I'm just kind of shuffling him around for a while. Like you say, a lot of JRPGs are like that, and for me they make you feel more like you're watching a character than controlling a character. I think that's a strike against them being accurately called role playing games because the role plays out the same regardless of your input.

The phrase "role playing" doesn't necessarily imply a lack of constrictions, to me. Renaissance Faire geeks role play as people from the time period, and doing so involves "staying in character" which means you can only do certain things. Model UN is role playing (at least the program director described it as such to me when I was in 8th grade), but you don't act how you feel like, you have to stay true to the role of a UN representative from a particular country. Hell, being an actor is role playing, and while your delivery may vary, you usually have to stick to the script.


I like the term Interactive Adventure Novel, because they do have structures similar to novels. Maybe Interactive Tactical Adventure Novel.

An "interactive adventure novel" would be an adventure novel (as in the adventure genre of fiction, e.g. Robert Louis Stevenson) with branching choices in an interactive hypertext form. :p Such things already exist, and were something of an internet fad in the late 90s.

[Gameguy]

I like the term Interactive Adventure Novel, because they do have structures similar to novels. Maybe Interactive Tactical Adventure Novel.
Interactive Novels are already a type of adventure game, they include games like Phoenix Wright and Hotel Dusk. There`s also Interactive Fiction which include games like Zork. Adventure games focus on puzzles, games that focus on combat or strategy aren`t adventure games.

[Nintega Grafx-16]

Oh yeah. He said that shit. What do you think about it?

Bioware is incapable of making fun games just like pretty much every Western RPG developer. Very hard for me to take them seriously.

[Icarus Moonsight]

Oh yeah and " LOL PONG IS A RPG BECAUSE IM A FUKIN SHITFACE"

Oh yeah dood. Shitfarce got racket-role'd play. English is like lying to the sand Bishop of Tyreel III. This Bioforce guy is no ape. Guy prolly can't even fart text like this. Chump ass. LOL

[Sabz5150]

The key difference is that there is no limit to the "input" that you can give to a live Game Master to be adjudicated. The possibilities are endless. That is the heart of what an actual role-playing game is. No video game can be so open ended.

With a live Game Master, there are only so many times you can do something stupid (albeit hilarious) before he decides that a five ton slab of ceiling comes down and crushes you. The computer AI will just keep saying "I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that".

[Sabz5150]

Bioware is incapable of making fun games just like pretty much every Western RPG developer. Very hard for me to take them seriously.

But you can bang hot blue chicks, and at the end of the day isn't that what we're really after?

[ScourDX]

I'm surprise no RPG company ever make a game based on existing accessories (IE: Wii Fit, Zap gun). One thing I can think of is how to get your character in shape. It will be an RPG where he/she has to find ways to lose weight, help supporting character with their weight and live happy ever after. I am sure it will make a lot of money especially with Wii fit attachment.

[Sabz5150]

I'm surprise no RPG company ever make a game based on existing accessories (IE: Wii Fit, Zap gun). One thing I can think of is how to get your character in shape. It will be an RPG where he/she has to find ways to lose weight, help supporting character with their weight and live happy ever after. I am sure it will make a lot of money especially with Wii fit attachment.

But what if I want to roleplay a sumo wrestler?

Can't wait to see the Fit board berating you for eating only 5,000 calories per day. Hilarity will ensue.

[ScourDX]

But what if I want to roleplay a sumo wrestler?

Can't wait to see the Fit board berating you for eating only 5,000 calories per day. Hilarity will ensue.

DDR Mat. LOL

I like to see role playing game based on Guitar hero or Rockband accessories.

[mobiusclimber]

DDR Mat. LOL

I like to see role playing game based on Guitar hero or Rockband accessories.

There already is one. Ephemeral Fantasia.

[Nintega Grafx-16]

There already is one. Ephemeral Fantasia.

Too bad the game blows.

[Astrocade]

^ That. I can't believe I read the first post, started scrolling down, barely reading anything, waiting to post EXACTLY THOSE THOUGHTS. Thanks, Maxlords! :)

And, actually, I think most action games nowadays are more "play a role" than many RPGs, in that you actually do get to choose your character, in many you change the looks entirely by choosing from preset hair, eyes, mouths, etc etc. How many games have a "create a character" feature. I mean, really, that would make most wrestling games RPGs.

I think Bioware sucks, frankly, if you want another controversial opinion. I don't think they've released a single RPG, either. Games like Mass Effect or whatever are actually FPS games, not RPGs. Dumbass is just trying to justify releasing shitty FPS games over and over by calling them RPGs and making a big deal about it. And oh yeah GET BACK ON THE DAMN PC WHERE YOUR SHITTY GAMES BELONG!

Sorry, had to rant.

:above me:

I'm with these guys. If Bioware has become the arbiter of what defines an RPG, then we're all fucked. Baldur's Gate is an exceptional twitch game, though.

Seriously, there's no real hard and fast rule as to what constitutes an RPG. Western RPGs are usually FPS with the ability to "level up", while many Japanese RPGs are little more than interactive cartoon adventure games. Remember those FMV games like Dragon's Lair and Space Ace where you had to click the correct button to proceed after watching a 30 second animated cutscene? That's pretty much the Final Fantasy series to me. (But wait- many purists don't consider FF to be RPGs either...)

Since I first played The Legend of Zelda back in 1988, everything I read concerning the games up until 1993 or so referred to them as the "quintessential" RPG series. But with the advent of internet trolling by nerds with superiority complexes, all of the sudden LoZ was no longer an RPG, it was, at best, an "adventure" game; at worst, a "platformer".

I'm one of the unconverted errant souls who still considers the Zelda games to be RPGs while Bioshock 2 is always going to be a FPS. Bioware's games are neither; they fall into the much broader category of shitty PC games masquerading on consoles.

[Drifter 2000]

I think a lot of this comes down to how you technically define what a RPG is. It's a debate I've seen, and been in more than a few times myself.

For me a RPG is a game that disconnects the player's abilities from those of the character on the screen. A player's skill should have little, to no effect on the success their in game avatar has when performing an action. This is why stats, skills, etc are all pretty much the common thing you see in all RPGs.

Any action that takes a degree of skill to perform should come down to the in-game character's abilities. Opening a door is something anyone can do. Repairing an engine, properly repairing a firearm, or even balancing on a thin beam are things that go above and beyond the skill of a normal person. These are things that are tested in an RPG by the use of numbers.

That's where the separation between "W-RPG" and "J-RPG" start to come into play. In a Western RPG the player basically is given reigns over designing the character they want to play. Their avatar will be skilled in whatever it is the player decides to to make him/her. This makes the avatar a more personal thing to the player; since it's their own.

Most Japanese RPGs put everything in front of the player. The characters are made, and the player simply guides their journey. However; most of what the characters can do is out of the player's hands. Damage, defense, etc are usually handled by numbers and equipment.

When player skill becomes involved...things start to lean more towards the Action RPG realm.

This is all my opinion though.

[Gameguy]

I like to see role playing game based on Guitar hero or Rockband accessories.
I don't know about an RPG, but what about a text adventure?


http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/5843/guitarhero5n.jpg

[shopkins]

Interactive Novels are already a type of adventure game, they include games like Phoenix Wright and Hotel Dusk.

I've more commonly heard those called Visual Novels.

Okay, so Interactive Adventure Novel is taken as j_factor pointed out, albeit by something rather obscure (I'm the number one source for the term right now if you Google it). But I still think that JRPGs feel like novels. They are long form stories in the video game medium that have time to focus on character development and complex plots. And they almost always focus on adventures or quests. Maybe Interactive Computer Quest Novel / Interactive Video Quest Novel? Video Quest Adventure? Graphical Adventure Novel? Video Adventure Novel? Tactical Computer Adventure Novel? I'll keep thinking about it and submit my findings to Japan.

Also, good point about the fact that constrictions are often inherent in the character you choose to play. The difference between LARPing George Washington and playing Shenmue, though, is that when LARPing you get to make the decisions yourself based on what you know about George Washington. In Shenmue those decisions are made for you by Ryo's AI. That just feels constrictive, and maybe I do think Ryo would ignore his aunt and stay out late at night if he really needs to find some sailors. The game doesn't let me decide. And of course becoming an existing person or fictional figure and trying to act as them isn't the only type of roleplaying, creating a character from scratch and trying to act how you've decided that character will act is probably more common.

[Gameguy]

I've more commonly heard those called Visual Novels..
I guess that's more accurate, I just keep remembering Hotel Dusk's website where it's described as an "Interactive mystery novel".
http://www.hoteldusk.com/



Okay, so Interactive Adventure Novel is taken as j_factor pointed out, albeit by something rather obscure (I'm the number one source for the term right now if you Google it). But I still think that JRPGs feel like novels. They are long form stories in the video game medium that have time to focus on character development and complex plots. And they almost always focus on adventures or quests. Maybe Interactive Computer Quest Novel / Interactive Video Quest Novel? Video Quest Adventure? Graphical Adventure Novel? Video Adventure Novel? Tactical Computer Adventure Novel? I'll keep thinking about it and submit my findings to Japan.

Also, good point about the fact that constrictions are often inherent in the character you choose to play. The difference between LARPing George Washington and playing Shenmue, though, is that when LARPing you get to make the decisions yourself based on what you know about George Washington. In Shenmue those decisions are made for you by Ryo's AI. That just feels constrictive, and maybe I do think Ryo would ignore his aunt and stay out late at night if he really needs to find some sailors. The game doesn't let me decide. And of course becoming an existing person or fictional figure and trying to act as them isn't the only type of roleplaying, creating a character from scratch and trying to act how you've decided that character will act is probably more common.
I don't feel that JRPGs are any type of adventure game. For standard adventure games you don't have direct control over the character, you just tell the character what to do and then they do it. When you can directly control the character's movement or actions it's considered an action-adventure game, it's still an adventure game because it would focus on puzzle solving. With JRPGs you have direct control over the player's movement, and the main focus is on battles, strategy, and statistics(levels, stamina, etc). It's really not an adventure game. There's the Quest for Glory series, but they're considered RPG/Adventure hybrids. Just because a game is linear doesn't mean that it has to be an adventure game, and just because a game has various paths doesn't mean that it's an RPG. Consider Maniac Mansion, it's definitely an adventure game but it's not that linear, you can select from various characters who each have various strengths and weaknesses and there's multiple solutions for puzzles and different endings for the game based on how you play it.

Shenmue is an adventure game, not an RPG.

[mobiusclimber]

And it's funny you bring up that point of Shenmue as being a sticking point b/c for me I almost wished I had less freedom. As was mocked by Penny Arcade, I could never understand why Ryu had no problem w/ playing arcade games, drinking a billion sodas or buying capsule toys when he's supposed to be out to avenge his father's death. To me, that's a problem w/ many adventure or role playing games: you're given all these side quests and things you CAN be out doing when you'd really think that given the situation the characters would want to get on w/ what they're supposed to be doing instead. I think Chrono Trigger is one of the few games that found a way around this problem.

[RetroYoungen]

I don't know if I might've just missed it, but what about the idea that, just maybe, what we've been calling the "traditional" JRPG is just a single role-playing campaign? I haven't actually played through a pen-and-paper game (just sat in on one or two), but from what I remember and have pieced together it seems like players will define their stats on their sheet, take on the role of the character they've created, start to explore to reach a certain point (something like "find the treasure of Astheron" or "kill the guy who kidnapped the princess"), collect items and upgrade weaponry/armor/spells along the way and reach a conclusion. Then they can use the same characters - if they all so decide - and have another go at another campaign.

Sounds actuallly fairly similar to a JRPG to me, just longer because you're playing with other people instead of a computerized form of dice-rolling and enemy generating.

Anyone think I'm just missing something here? I think this could end up akin to the "are video games are" cerfuffle, which is just a way to stir up a pot and call someone else wrong/right/confused on a topic that doesn't have a right or wrong answer.

*shrug*

I've enjoyed Persona, personally. I call it a JRPG.

[Sothy]

Bioware is incapable of making fun games just like pretty much every Western RPG developer. Very hard for me to take them seriously.



I agree.. Mass Effect, Fallout, Morrowind, Knights of the old Republic and Deus Ex are all garbage.

I suggest watching this http://www.youtube.com/user/MissHannahMinx#p/u/19/ifA1AQe_NF0


And then playing a JRPG with generic angsty hero with cutesy comedic sidekick... you know "THAT ONE" I mean.

[Drifter 2000]

Bioware is incapable of making fun games just like pretty much every Western RPG developer. Very hard for me to take them seriously.

I'm glad you stated this was an opinion; instead of fact. :roll:

Western RPGS are my favorite genre personally. Have been for years.

On the other hand; Japanese RPGs pretty well put me to sleep. Unless it's Monster Hunter, or something of that ilk.

[Richter Belmount]

I suggest watching this http://www.youtube.com/user/MissHannahMinx#p/u/19/ifA1AQe_NF0
.

Fucking cocktease

[JimmyDean]

I don't know about an RPG, but what about a text adventure?


http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/5843/guitarhero5n.jpg

He must have the DOS emulation card in his Amiga! He could make some money off that on ebay. (Yes, I am an Amiga fanboy)

[mobiusclimber]

I agree.. Mass Effect, Fallout, Morrowind, Knights of the old Republic and Deus Ex are all garbage.

I suggest watching this http://www.youtube.com/user/MissHannahMinx#p/u/19/ifA1AQe_NF0


And then playing a JRPG with generic angsty hero with cutesy comedic sidekick... you know "THAT ONE" I mean.

Eh, I'm not sure how or why people even call Mass Effect or Fallout 3 RPGs in the first place. Both looking and play so much like an FPS that they might as well be. Seriously, is b/c you have stats that go up? Wow. I find it odd that people will whine loudly if you call Legend of Zelda an RPG but almost no one has a problem calling these games RPGs.

And as many people love Mass Effect, Fallout 3, Morrowind... these games do absolutely nothing for me. There are good WRPGs I'm sure, but maybe you just have to have played them in the past to really like stuff like this. They didn't impress me w/ their storytelling (or, in the case of Oblivion and Morrowind, lack thereof), and the gameplay mechanics were frustrating and boring. I mean, maybe if it gets a fratboy to think for two seconds and grow out of the Halo/COD stupor, it's not all bad, but I somehow don't think it even had that effect.

I can't defend modern JRPGs b/c they're just as bad. Most of them seem to be designed by a committee who use the same formula over and over again. But I'll still play them (usually) if it means I don't have to play an FPS and pretend it's an RPG. I'm actually getting sick of the FPS genre ruining my favorite games. (Silent Hill Homecoming cribs the control scheme of most FPS games, and lord knows I don't want to find out how much further Shattered Memories has gone down that path.)

Maybe this just means that the current generation is not for me. I didn't grow up playing PC games, so I have no real love for them. I don't know how to play them, and I don't really feel like learning (especially when I have the sneaking suspicion that the older PC games are far better - I mean, come on, Fallout 1 & 2, or Fallout 3; System Shock 1 & 2 or Bioshock).

I know, this has little to do w/ the topic at hand. Just seems like lately the most fun I've had gaming has been on handhelds playing JRPGs that are finally getting released in NA (Dragon Quest V, for instance) or playing my older consoles. Heck, I've enjoyed the recent PS2 releases a lot more than any 360 or Wii game I've played. I have a bad feeling that the future of RPGs is just going to go further and further along this path. Soon every FPS will have stat building and decision making "that effects the outcome of the game OMG" and get called an RPG, and every JRPG will have the same stock characters and storyline, or feature less and less interactivity (or all of the above).

[Sothy]

if it means I don't have to play an FPS and pretend it's an RPG. I'm actually getting sick of the FPS genre ruining my favorite games.


What does the view of the character have to do with its genre? That's like saying because it is top down, Dragon Warrior is a R.C. PRO AM ripoff?





these games do absolutely nothing for me. There are good WRPGs I'm sure, but maybe you just have to have played them in the past to really like stuff like this. They didn't impress me w/ their storytelling (or, in the case of Oblivion and Morrowind, lack thereof), and the gameplay mechanics were frustrating and boring. I mean, maybe if it gets a fratboy to think for two seconds and grow out of the Halo/COD stupor, it's not all bad, but I somehow don't think it even had that effect.



Don't worry the frat boys are still jerking off about over-rated garbage like FF7.

[Richter Belmount]

Fps/rpgs arent a bad thing , they provide alot of freedom for the player and let you play the game the way you want to. It just seems more like square enix is trying to turn rpgs into bad anime by being so linear and focusing too much on mellowdrama.

[Icarus Moonsight]

What does the view of the character have to do with its genre? That's like saying because it is top down, Dragon Warrior is a R.C. PRO AM ripoff?

Don't worry the frat boys are still jerking off about over-rated garbage like FF7.

:above me:
I would pay to have the existence of FF7 ripped out of my memory/consciousness and blocked from any further perception or recognition... 4, 5, 6... *blank stare* ...8... On second thought, I'll wait for the BOGO and get 7 and 8 done together.

Also, Wolfenstein 3D is a total Morrowind/Oblivion rip-off. I have proof.

[mobiusclimber]

What does the view of the character have to do with its genre? That's like saying because it is top down, Dragon Warrior is a R.C. PRO AM ripoff?

The entire battle engine of Mass Effect, Bioshock and Fallout 3 is an FPS with stat building thrown in. You use a gun to shoot, you strafe, you duck behind cover. They're a stat-building system shy of being Gears of War, basically. And no, the fact that there's melee weapons doesn't change anything. (Most FPS games have melee weapons. Is Half Life an RPG?)




Don't worry the frat boys are still jerking off about over-rated garbage like FF7.

Not sure that there are the same people jerking off over FF7 that jerk off over Halo. I'm not sure that FF7 fans can be called "frat boys." Emo boys, I can understand. But frat boys???

[Icarus Moonsight]

Fraternity is a group of men/boys... Technically NAMBLA qualifies as a fraternity. They also would gladly accept Emo kids. Probably because they're easier to manipulate/browbeat into the pillow-biter position. Maybe that's why FF7 sold for what it did for that long? The demand spiked because NAMBLA needed carrots for their sticks! OMG, the truth is out there!!!

BRB... Dictaphone... Damn.

[TonyTheTiger]

Fps/rpgs arent a bad thing , they provide alot of freedom for the player and let you play the game the way you want to. It just seems more like square enix is trying to turn rpgs into bad anime by being so linear and focusing too much on mellowdrama.

That's mostly Tetsuya Nomura's influence. FFVII and FFVIII had reasonable character designs. But the PS2 era ushered in his zipper and belt fetishes.

I'm no huge fan of FFVIII but compare Squall from FFVIII and Kingdom Hearts to see how Nomura took a big leap of crazy post 2000.

http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m288/Ern3st/Squall_Leonhart-Render_5.jpg

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.joystiq.com/media/2007/09/squall225.jpg

In FFVIII, yeah, there were some embellishments but he looked relatively normal. By Kingdom Hearts, now he's got zippers on his pants, belts around his arms, short sleeves paired with gloves, and he's not even standing like a fucking human being.

And over time Nomura's influence has only gotten bigger. If Square Enix has ventured into stereotypical anime territory then he's the reason. One of the reasons why I like FFXII so much is because it's a breath of fresh air.

[mobiusclimber]

While I agree w/ you, I think Squall is a terrible example. If you look, FF8 Squall has just as much retarded crap as KH Squall. For instance, you can't see the zipper on his leg b/c it's on the opposite leg, but I know it's there b/c he has those three stupid belt buckles on his leg that are ostensibly holding the zipper closed (???). He's got dual belts on, a flippin' trinket on a chain on the end of his gun blade, and a fur-lined jacket that doesn't fit him!

FF7 was the beginning of the end for the Square. They basically made the JRPG version of Neon Genesis Evangelion. If you know the history of Gainax, you'll know how badly creating a cultural phenomenon that legitimized a genre and made a buttload of cash fucked that company up. That's basically been Square's problem. The exaggerated stereotypes for characters, the over-reliance of FMV and bombast, the needlessly complicated character customization system that discarded the very notion of one person being good at anything so your characters can master every damn spell in the game, and the angst, my god the angst! Now I'm not one of those FF7 haters. I actually think Square did a lot of things right w/ the game. But I also think they didn't have a single clue as to just WHAT they did right and why it was right at the time. What really bothers me is when they create a game with as detailed and rich a world as FF13 and then have to saddle the game with annoying characters, pointless over-customization and a battle engine that practically plays itself. Why???? B/c that's what Square does!

Granted, none of this has anything to do w/ this topic.

[shopkins]

The worst recent design is Cloud's Advent Children look, which is playable in Dissidia. It looks like he's wearing half a coat! I'm sorry, but that design should have been rejected simply for being fucking stupid.

[Icarus Moonsight]

The worst recent design is Cloud's Advent Children look, which is playable in Dissidia. It looks like he's wearing half a coat! I'm sorry, but that design should have been rejected simply for being fucking stupid.

If that didn't stop 7, then it's not going to stop half a jacket...



http://www.blogcdn.com/www.joystiq.com/media/2007/09/squall225.jpg

If I only had the 'shoppin' skill... That's begging for a "Stabbed yourself in the junk" treatment.

[Sothy]

The entire battle engine of Mass Effect, Bioshock and Fallout 3 is an FPS with stat building thrown in. You use a gun to shoot, you strafe, you duck behind cover. They're a stat-building system shy of being Gears of War, basically. And no, the fact that there's melee weapons doesn't change anything. (Most FPS games have melee weapons. Is Half Life an RPG?)





http://8.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ktokc5dyBh1qzeovdo1_500.jpg

[Eternal Tune]

The worst recent design is Cloud's Advent Children look, which is playable in Dissidia. It looks like he's wearing half a coat! I'm sorry, but that design should have been rejected simply for being fucking stupid.

Say what you people want about Squall, but leave Cloud out of this!

[ShinGundam]

One of the reasons why I like FFXII so much is because it's a breath of fresh air.
:confused: I don't hate FF12 designs but they still have belts and far uglier. Also, How can Kuja and Zidene get free pass ?
http://www.ffplanet.com/ff12/ff12_vaan_e_ashe.gif
http://i47.tinypic.com/2vwcvah.jpg
http://www.freewebs.com/darth_shiva/kuja%20evil.jpg

[kupomogli]

I think FF12 has good character designs. Everyone except Vaan and Basch.

Also. You guys do know that the character designer for FF12 wasn't Tetsuya Nomura right? That's why every character doesn't look exactly the same :P. FF12 was by Akihiko Yoshida while FF9 was by Yoshitaka Amano.

[Hari Seldon]

Maybe this just means that the current generation is not for me. I didn't grow up playing PC games, so I have no real love for them. I don't know how to play them, and I don't really feel like learning (especially when I have the sneaking suspicion that the older PC games are far better - I mean, come on, Fallout 1 & 2, or Fallout 3; System Shock 1 & 2 or Bioshock).

They are. I still have to find a game half as good as the original X-COM.

[TonyTheTiger]

There's nothing wrong with belts. What does matter, however, is that the belts are around the wearer's waist. Same goes for zippers. Zippers are fine so long as they are on something that should need to be zipped up or down.

Squall's FFVIII embellishments are subtle enough that it doesn't look like he got sloshed at Party City. The issue with current Nomura is that he changed the focus. With FFVIII's Squall your focus is drawn to the jacket that could conceivably exist, his white T-shirt, and the black (leather?) pants. The embellishments are just that, embellishments. He's wearing more than one belt but they're mostly around his waist and don't scream "LOOK AT HOW WACKY I AM" because they're brown and look like normal gunslinger belts.

Same goes for FFVII Cloud. In that case it's his sword and hair that draws most of the focus but his clothing composition, while not something anybody would likely wear, has a makeup that is at least appropriate. Things are where they're supposed to be.

Compare that to what is possibly Nomura's most egregious example:

http://www.finalfantasyworld.co.uk/khextreme/kh2/images/artwork/KH2_Artwork_Sora2.jpg

Forget even the fact that Sora has belts around his shoulders and zippers on his shoes. Look at the color scheme. It's actually designed to make you focus on the wacky shit. That's the worst part of it. Not so much the accessory placement but the fact that Nomura is consciously trying to make those misplaced accessories the focus of the ensemble. You may as well stick a lampshade on his head.


FF7 was the beginning of the end for the Square. They basically made the JRPG version of Neon Genesis Evangelion. If you know the history of Gainax, you'll know how badly creating a cultural phenomenon that legitimized a genre and made a buttload of cash fucked that company up. That's basically been Square's problem. The exaggerated stereotypes for characters, the over-reliance of FMV and bombast, the needlessly complicated character customization system that discarded the very notion of one person being good at anything so your characters can master every damn spell in the game, and the angst, my god the angst!

While you're right in principle...FFVII is not the right game to lay that on. Mostly because either it doesn't do the things you say it does or earlier games do what you say it started. The characters in FFVI can learn every spell in the game, too. It takes a stupid amount of time but it's possible. The Esper system and Materia system are not very different from each other at all. In fact, FFVI and FFVII aren't that different as a whole. There are a lot of parallels.

The overuse (or rather misuse) of FMV really started with FFVIII. That was the game where each character was introduced with a 30 second clip of them walking up to the camera and striking a pose. But that was the game where things forced you to slow down to watch the pretty pictures throughout the game. The battles were slow on purpose. FFVII was actually pretty fast.

And FFVII didn't have much angst, either. At least not any more than FFVI did. Depending on what you did during a certain scene, FFVI had one of your characters attempt suicide. For whatever angst FFVII had, nobody tried to off him or herself.

The angst that gets attributed to FFVII was retconned into it by later games. Cloud was actually pretty assertive in FFVII. Then Advent Children comes around and he's all lethargic about life.

I think what you're getting at is at some point (whenever that was) Square went the route of style over substance and then wrote the games' scripts in a way that front loaded it with a lot of pseudo-philosophical existential nonsense that pretended to be deep but only served to be confusing. Not unlike Evangelion does. If you want a really good example of a fairly simple story made nigh indecipherable thanks to obtuse writing, play through Chrono Cross.

And, believe it or not, I don't mind style over substance. Sometimes it's nice to turn off your brain and just go with it. FFXII pretty much has no substance. It's just a "kill the evil king" story. But what I like is that it doesn't try to pretend there's more to it than there is.

[mobiusclimber]

That's the thing tho: FF7 was hugely popular and made Square insane amounts of money. I agree that 8 was were they went wrong, but it was b/c of how successful 7 was and the blatant attempts to figure out what it was that people loved about 7. Sephiroth and Vincent were the popular characters, so angsty pretty boys and goths w/ weird clothes must be the focus of every game from here on out!

I wouldn't call the suicide in 6 to be particularly angsty. She doesn't write a suicide note like Winona Ryder's in Beetlejuice. I don't want to get into the particulars for anyone reading who hasn't played the game, but considering what just happened and what the implications are, it makes perfect sense to just want to give up.

And yeah 6 did have the Esper system where anyone could learn any magic spell. I really liked that in 6 b/c the game was one of the few RPGs that was "leaderless." Pretty much anyone could be at the head of the party and you weren't really stuck w/ that one person in the immovable top spot. I also really liked 7's system, but if I'd have known that's where the series was going from then on, I think I would have been less happy about it.

[TonyTheTiger]

How can you say an attempted suicide, whatever the reason, is less angsty than something like Tidus whining about Yuna in FFX? If you can justify suicide because of the situation surrounding it, then you can certainly justify Tidus's attitude because his girlfriend was going to die and all of his friends were pretty much OK with it. You can trace "angst" even back to FFIV with Tellah going apeshit on Edward. I don't think there's really anything special about FFVII or even the later games.

The angst isn't the problem. The problem was that what Square followed through with was the "wacky" part of the characters and cranked the dial up to 11. They took a superficial look at FFVII, saw that their popular game had wild hair and exaggerated weapons/clothing, and then ran with that. Hence Sora up there.

It wasn't Cloud's attitude that caused Square to go nuts. It was his hair. Cloud wasn't angsty. Hell, Sephiroth wasn't even angsty. He wanted to become a god because he had a superiority complex. Usually angsty people have the opposite, an inferiority complex. The FF character people use to argue angst is Tidus. But, like I said, his girlfriend was going to die and everybody was telling him that it was necessary. I'd probably be pretty "WTF is wrong with you people?" too. And even if that is angsty, he never jumped off a cliff. But Tidus's outfit is ridiculous. And he has that outfit because ever since Cloud's hair showed up "wacky" shit was the popular trend.

[mobiusclimber]

There's angsty suicide and non-angsty suicide. FF6 didnt have a big "woe is me, boohoo" angsty suicide. It was quiet and reflective. There was no bad emo poetry. So yeah the "whining" is what makes it angsty.

[TonyTheTiger]

I don't know. I think suicide is pretty much as angsty as you can get regardless of the verbal cues. After all, it's pretty much the ultimate "woe is me" action to take unless it's for some greater cause or something. Celes just gave up on life right then and there. Tidus complained that his friends wanted his girlfriend to get her ass killed. I'd call the former the more angsty and far less justified.

And, like I said, Tellah was bitching about Edward back in FFIV and for reasons that are arguably less serious than what Tidus was bitching about. So you can't blame FFVII for any of that.

[Kyle15]

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.joystiq.com/media/2007/09/squall225.jpg


I never thought the whole belt thing was very bad until I saw this. Here's what I'd do:

-Remove those arm belts.
-Cut those mini trouser-snaps on his leg.
-Get rid of the belt under the two brown ones! Those two can stay.
-Everything else? Stay as is.

If I had good photoshop skills I would totally edit that for comparison. He'd look so much better that way.

IMHO, Nomura did wonderful on The World Ends with You. Sure there were zippers and belts, but not like the above example. It must have been because he based the character's clothes on real fashion instead of tossing around loads of un-needed equipment and fantasy trinkets.

[Astrocade]

While I'm not into the FF series, I really don't think that the character designs are that terrible. What I do find intolerable is the human beings that feel that dressing like their favorite FF characters will make them "cool". If I see one more emo flamer with his hair styled like Cloud I will spray him in the face with Windex.

Back to shitty character designs; I refused to play Resident Evil 4 for almost two years based solely on the stupid emo haircut that Leon Kennedy has.