Bioware Writer: JRPGs are not RPGs

[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 " 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. 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 " 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.

[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.

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