surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
So basically you're saying that jrpg is a story chained together by random encounters and scripted fights critical to the story with only one path to choose from? Yea that makes sense.
Nice write up. I remember you mentioning this on the latest Podtoid, but then forgot about it. So now, while it's fresh in my mind, I will make sure to check it out.
P.S. I love all RPGs, and I disagree with everything you just said. :-)
P.S. I love all RPGs, and I disagree with everything you just said. :-)
I'd always prefer a JRPG over something like Fallout 3, that although it has a great setting has very little (and also quite bad) story.
Also there are almost no games, that have well written story.
Also there are almost no games, that have well written story.
You can't even do a low level game. What a crock of shit. That being said I level grinded for about 15 levels before I started the plot. So it was pretty much like every other RPG I play.
I can't play JRPGs for these very reasons. I am very opposed to grinding for several reasons and The Linear RPG pretty much shows most of them.
My other reasons for not playing RPGs usually boils down to the combat system. On a 16 or 8 bit system these combat systems make sense because it fits the limitations. When I have the system from a JRPG sitting next to something like KotOR(not a great example I know but it sort of works) you start to see my problem.
One of the only times I can tolerate grinding is on those lower bit systems. I don't know why but I can sit in pokemon for ages levelling my stuff. I did the same on Riviera (remake on PSP but I assume it was the same on GBA). I think that's more a thing to do with is being portable and therefore I do it in small chunks a time.
My other reasons for not playing RPGs usually boils down to the combat system. On a 16 or 8 bit system these combat systems make sense because it fits the limitations. When I have the system from a JRPG sitting next to something like KotOR(not a great example I know but it sort of works) you start to see my problem.
One of the only times I can tolerate grinding is on those lower bit systems. I don't know why but I can sit in pokemon for ages levelling my stuff. I did the same on Riviera (remake on PSP but I assume it was the same on GBA). I think that's more a thing to do with is being portable and therefore I do it in small chunks a time.
You know, JRPG would make nice books and movies surprisingly, most likely because they're story focused usually. WRPGs are usually gameplay oriented and thus probably don't make good books or movies. Of course it seems most people forgot what TRUE rpgs is all about, role playing games. Are you role playing in your games? I guess actualy role playing is meant to be stuck in MMORPGS roleplaying servers.
It is surprisingly difficult to create an original story for a Hero. I mean, when I was in college they even showed me a formula for "The Hero's Story" and gave examples of what follows it to a T like Star Wars.
1. Life as Normal
2. Hero meets mentor who administers the "Call to Action"
3. Hero denies Call to Action
4. Normal Life Destroyed by Bad Guys forcing Hero to accept call
blah blah blah I can't remember the rest but you get the idea
It's all the same, kind of sad and terrible
1. Life as Normal
2. Hero meets mentor who administers the "Call to Action"
3. Hero denies Call to Action
4. Normal Life Destroyed by Bad Guys forcing Hero to accept call
blah blah blah I can't remember the rest but you get the idea
It's all the same, kind of sad and terrible
While I agree that linear JRPGs are basically glorified "running left to right-fests" when you strip them down to their bare bones, I also think just about any game could be made to look just as simple when given the same treatment. Take Super Mario Bros, for example. That game is, quite literally, running left to right. One could argue that Mario Bros requires actual skill and adaptation to make it through the game, but many RPG's are the same way if you try to make it through without grinding levels. When you hit that "sweet spot" in an RPG where the fights are difficult but not impossible, and each fight requires a bit of strategy and planning to succeed without major losses, that's a bit more in-depth than "running left to right".
Ok I'm level 62 now. Where's the bonus dungeon for easy grinding? Dammit if there's no bonus dungeon I want my money back. I paid good money for this shit.
you've pretty much described almost every video game ever, not just jrpgs. most games get you from point A to point B through a series of challenges laid out in a sequential pattern. the few that are 'do what you want' pretend to offer you freedom, but you still have to accomplish certain tasks to attain 'the ending'. jrpgs just tend to have more in-between time where you grind up your levels, as opposed to unlocking a door to get a better gun or whatever.
and you can strip any game down to its basics and it will suck. if you were shooting stick figures on a white background with pellets, you might last 5 minutes before turning it off. no game is particularly compelling when you take away what fills that game in. if gta was just a dot getting into a box and driving that box around running over other dots, maybe getting out and hitting dots with a stick, it would suck a little bit more than the real gta.
and you can strip any game down to its basics and it will suck. if you were shooting stick figures on a white background with pellets, you might last 5 minutes before turning it off. no game is particularly compelling when you take away what fills that game in. if gta was just a dot getting into a box and driving that box around running over other dots, maybe getting out and hitting dots with a stick, it would suck a little bit more than the real gta.
I think you may be misunderstanding what people like about JRPGs....as a fan, I find myself drawn to the odd cultural specifics and the art style. In most cases, the story is disposable. The grinding is kind of give and take: At its worst, you have a mind-numbing creep; at its best there actually are fights that can become like puzzles that require memorization and planning. Even boring grinding has a purpose...it can be oddly therapeutic.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that, in trying to make a point, the game's creator actually ripped out the part that many people find appealing and left the part some of us couldn't care less about.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that, in trying to make a point, the game's creator actually ripped out the part that many people find appealing and left the part some of us couldn't care less about.
Anthony, you are right. I too hate RPGs, and, like you, I hate them because I have to grind endlessly through a lousy combat system for a story that's pretty bad.
I used to say that RPG meant "Bad combat system." And I think that this comments still rings true. GTA3: San Andreas was not an RPG, even though it had an RPG-like system tacked on. Likewise, the Armored Core games give you the ILLUSION of choice, but ultimately stick you into a static ending/story line.
On the other hand, Diablo is considered an RPG because it has endless grinding and character upgrading. I can say the same for FF10 (which could be played equally well by a turbo controller and a piece of tape).
My favorite part of "Linear RPG" was going out, grinding, gaining 2 or 3 levels and dieing. I felt so jipped! Just as wronged as I did when all of my Pokemon fainted, or when Cloud and his party kicked the bucket for the umpteenth time.
I used to say that RPG meant "Bad combat system." And I think that this comments still rings true. GTA3: San Andreas was not an RPG, even though it had an RPG-like system tacked on. Likewise, the Armored Core games give you the ILLUSION of choice, but ultimately stick you into a static ending/story line.
On the other hand, Diablo is considered an RPG because it has endless grinding and character upgrading. I can say the same for FF10 (which could be played equally well by a turbo controller and a piece of tape).
My favorite part of "Linear RPG" was going out, grinding, gaining 2 or 3 levels and dieing. I felt so jipped! Just as wronged as I did when all of my Pokemon fainted, or when Cloud and his party kicked the bucket for the umpteenth time.
I guess I summed my feelings up on TIG, but yeah, it's a remarkably intelligent game. Any criticism you have against it is instantly parried to any other RPG from the last twenty years of gaming. The one concession I would make would be regarding Planescape: Torment style games where progression is much more focussed on story rather than leveling, but still you are constantly rewarded with EXP for each positive narrative action so even the most high-brow of Role Playing games can't escape the most generic convention.
Anviltongue:
If it's the art and the cultural specifics you dig, don't you wish they were attached to a type of game with a not-disposable story and not potentially irritating grinding?
If it's the art and the cultural specifics you dig, don't you wish they were attached to a type of game with a not-disposable story and not potentially irritating grinding?
Great analyzation. I love JRPGs, but they're obviously niche. What normal person would find grinding rewarding?
I completely agree with Anviltongue though. It's so give and take; we can't stereo-type an entire genre. Games like XenoGears had a GRAND story, with very colorful and interesting characters. The majority require grinding, true, but there are enough JRPGs with interesting battle systems to eliminate this stereotype:
Legend of Legaia, XenoGears, Legend of Dragoon, Super Mario RPG, Secret of Mana...etc..
I completely agree with Anviltongue though. It's so give and take; we can't stereo-type an entire genre. Games like XenoGears had a GRAND story, with very colorful and interesting characters. The majority require grinding, true, but there are enough JRPGs with interesting battle systems to eliminate this stereotype:
Legend of Legaia, XenoGears, Legend of Dragoon, Super Mario RPG, Secret of Mana...etc..
I think you've keyed what makes RPGs bad, but in doing so what can make an RPG great Anthony (of which there have been few or less this console generation). Great stories, characters with developed backgrounds, combat that is both challenging and deep. Linear does it's job right by stripping these things down to a pixel character following a line, ridiculous story that extended the game rather than adding anything positive to it.
Good RPGs are out there, great RPGS are almost extinct.
Good RPGs are out there, great RPGS are almost extinct.
anthony, with all do respect intended... i think you just under analyze JRPGs... Though there are some that bug me to the extreme (like FFX, the most linear game ever)
I agree completely. JRPGs are largely a waste of time. Games like Diablo, on the other hand, while heavy grinding with minimal story, are also fun because they're multiplayer and you can share the fun of making your dude uber powerful and fighting over loot and co-operating against massive armies. But a single player 80 hour game that's just linear piss-poorr story with boring menu-driven combat and a-to-b progress? No thanks, I've got better things to do with my time.
Oddly enough, I hold FFX in high regard in terms of enjoying the very linear story, more so than some other final fantasy entries. Maybe because the illusion of freedom is very week, and the story itself is specifically *about* a well-worn, deliberately linear journey.
So damn true. Someday I'd like to be blessed with an idea that turns all this shit on its head. Someday...
@RJG
I don't think anyone could top that response. You've summed up every true complaint regarding standard JRPGS most eloquently.
Have you played a few of the non-standard fare games? Secret of Mana was mutliplayer, for instance. Tales of Vesperia was also MP, and tried to resurrect some of Mana's feel, keeping an action based battle system.
I don't think anyone could top that response. You've summed up every true complaint regarding standard JRPGS most eloquently.
Have you played a few of the non-standard fare games? Secret of Mana was mutliplayer, for instance. Tales of Vesperia was also MP, and tried to resurrect some of Mana's feel, keeping an action based battle system.
i find diablo to be boring in the extreme.... seriously repetitive. don't understand how someone can play through 100 hours of the sameness that is diablo or similar, but not like the grinding aspect of other rpgs. and except for a few exceptions (tales of...) i prefer menu based combat over pressing x over and over and over and over again. but i guess that's why there are different styles of gameplay, so we all have something we enjoy.
"linear JRPGs, by their very nature, have almost nothing intrinsically interesting to offer the player."
Fail. Just fail. While I'd like to have stopped here, I will say I was masochistic enough to finish. What I will say is none of this drivel is even worth a point by point refutation.
"Ohnoes, I hate this genre so let me sit here and attack the very things people like about it!" Brilliantly thought out, as always. *eyeroll*
Fail. Just fail. While I'd like to have stopped here, I will say I was masochistic enough to finish. What I will say is none of this drivel is even worth a point by point refutation.
"Ohnoes, I hate this genre so let me sit here and attack the very things people like about it!" Brilliantly thought out, as always. *eyeroll*
There's nothing wrong with the JRPG conventions per se. The problem with JRPGs (as opposed to other games) is that they're lossy machine-copies of previous, better JRPGs, and almost never introduce any kind of idea or innovation to the formula, down the the very characters in the story.
I hated RPGs when I was a kid because of the "shitty" combat system, but then I discovered something: they're a much better device for storytelling than any other genre, once you get over the less-directly-interactive hangup. However, over the last decade or so, the stories have gotten so bad that this advantage has been lost; and indeed, in the last couple years, even the combat systems have fallen apart. You can't tell me that, say, Eternal Sonata has a combat system as good as *any* SNES Squaresoft or Enix game. I literally feel carsick when I play it.
I know the hardcore Otakus like to say "doom clone lawl" but playing almost any FPS is a very different experience from playing an FPS 5 years younger than it. Furthermore, the problem is almost entirely isolated to JRPGs. Western RPGs are humming along just nicely.
I hated RPGs when I was a kid because of the "shitty" combat system, but then I discovered something: they're a much better device for storytelling than any other genre, once you get over the less-directly-interactive hangup. However, over the last decade or so, the stories have gotten so bad that this advantage has been lost; and indeed, in the last couple years, even the combat systems have fallen apart. You can't tell me that, say, Eternal Sonata has a combat system as good as *any* SNES Squaresoft or Enix game. I literally feel carsick when I play it.
I know the hardcore Otakus like to say "doom clone lawl" but playing almost any FPS is a very different experience from playing an FPS 5 years younger than it. Furthermore, the problem is almost entirely isolated to JRPGs. Western RPGs are humming along just nicely.
I played this the other day after you mentioned it on Podtoid. I totally get where the game is coming from, boiling down a JRPG to its base characteristics, but I actually enjoyed it, too. I probably wouldn't have were it any longer than it is, but I am not going to take what The Linear RPG taught me to heart; I'll still play JRPGs, so long as they're "good."
Perhaps you are just trying to over analyze something that just comes down to a matter of what you want from a game experience. To me, JRPGs offer a completely unique style of game - an immersion in a story OF THAT KIND. Lord of the Rings modulations, basically. Re-imaginings of age old stories. They're like interactive neo-myths - the stories, if of a high quality, obviously resonate with people on a level that is deep and subconcious; they allow us to immerse oursleves in an empowered fantastical scenario. And if done well, they are completely rewarding, in a simple, standard game 'collect and gain points and avoid death' way, as well as in a uniquely emotional, imminently memorable and uniquely therapuetic way that seems to be unique to that particular marriage of game mechanics and multi-faceted fantasy story style. Plus, J part of the RPG - the unique tinge the Japanese culture gives these stories and characters. And the fantasy setting is important. You either like and resonate with the aesthetic or you don't. Thats not to say there aren't legions of dull JRPGs, there are of course. It all depends on how you judge a games worth depending on what it offered you in the time it took you to play it. For all Lost Odysseys oh-so-slightly dull walk around/random battle areas, I enjoyed the story, wanted to know what would happen to the characters, see the next part of the continent, hear the next areas music etc. I`m sure i'm not the only one, but I AM role playing when I play these games. That is the thing, some part of you wants to be doing what these characters are doing, experiencing what they are. Its a question of imagination, and projection, clearly something people who enjoy JRPGs do without much conscious effort, and something you may find hard to do Anthony? Or perhaps you feel the enjoyment of this aspect is tainted by the rest of the mechanics. I could see this point of view, especially now I am older and can't put as much time into games. Certain areas of Lost Odyssey seemed to be a bit of a trudge, always dreading that random battle to commence. Still, the characters, art, story and general old-school nature of Lost Odyssey make it a winner to most. I`d speculate that speeding up the flow in, and out, of the random battles, would of given the game a much needed shot in the arm as far as reducing the mediocrity of the random battles. Have some faith in the formula!
I'm not really sure it's a fair analysis, especially given that when you boil any game down to its "bare minimum" and start making blanket judgments about its conventions, every game looks preposterous.
There ARE strategic decisions to be made in a jRPG, or some of them, at least. For example, in Persona 4, you decide how you'll be spending your time, be it exploring the dungeon, socializing, or improving your skills. Doing most activities uses up time that could otherwise have affected your ability to do things later. Will you spend your day studying to ace an exam (giving awards of cash and social recognition), or improve a social link (affecting your ability to fuse powerful personas of that link's arcana). Fusing particular persona also improves their abilities to affect you in and out of combat.
As for supposedly "throwaway" stories, it comes down to personal preference. Nearly every RPG story, or for that matter every game story, is one or more variations on the heroic journey, with a protagonist starting off weak and becoming stronger, eventually reaching an end goal, and affecting himself and the world around him.
Take some of the favorite examples of western RPG superiority. Oblivion and Fallout 3 feature no particularly different deviation from the heroic journey, nor do Baldur's Gate or Knights of the Old Republic.
Take Bioshock. It's almost completely linear. Nothing in the game world is changed except for a single decision you make at the beginning of the game. Doing one thing makes you a saint, the other a devil. There are no particularly meaningful or strategic decisions you can make after that, that don't have to do with your facilitating further progression.
This kind of gross oversimplification doesn't just do a disservice to jRPGs, it does a disservice to ALL games, and the people that play them.
There ARE strategic decisions to be made in a jRPG, or some of them, at least. For example, in Persona 4, you decide how you'll be spending your time, be it exploring the dungeon, socializing, or improving your skills. Doing most activities uses up time that could otherwise have affected your ability to do things later. Will you spend your day studying to ace an exam (giving awards of cash and social recognition), or improve a social link (affecting your ability to fuse powerful personas of that link's arcana). Fusing particular persona also improves their abilities to affect you in and out of combat.
As for supposedly "throwaway" stories, it comes down to personal preference. Nearly every RPG story, or for that matter every game story, is one or more variations on the heroic journey, with a protagonist starting off weak and becoming stronger, eventually reaching an end goal, and affecting himself and the world around him.
Take some of the favorite examples of western RPG superiority. Oblivion and Fallout 3 feature no particularly different deviation from the heroic journey, nor do Baldur's Gate or Knights of the Old Republic.
Take Bioshock. It's almost completely linear. Nothing in the game world is changed except for a single decision you make at the beginning of the game. Doing one thing makes you a saint, the other a devil. There are no particularly meaningful or strategic decisions you can make after that, that don't have to do with your facilitating further progression.
This kind of gross oversimplification doesn't just do a disservice to jRPGs, it does a disservice to ALL games, and the people that play them.
@lovemana23: i'm scared to read that giant wall o text monster. seriously.. im not going to read that cause it scares the shit out of me.
@Mr. Burch: Thank you for being honest.
@Mr. Burch: Thank you for being honest.
hitnrun:
"I hated RPGs when I was a kid because of the "shitty" combat system, but then I discovered something: they're a much better device for storytelling than any other genre, once you get over the less-directly-interactive hangup."
I'm not sure I understand -- JRPGs may include the most story, yes, but I don't really see how they're a better device for it. The story isn't developed in a really game-centric way -- reading a lot of text has since been replaced in this new generation with watching a lot of cutscenes -- and since your control over the characters is distant at best, one doesn't even get the sense of full interaction with and immersion in a story like you might with cripplingly cutscene-heavy games like MGS.
Dexter345:
Yeah, that's a flaw with the game. It should be much longer than it is, just to drive home the monotony.
lovemana23:
I'm not sure if I agree that "you either like and resonate with the aesthetic or you don't." I loved JRPGs when I was a kid, but now that I've got less time on my hands and a better understanding of how story can be conveyed through gameplay, I can respect how useful they once were while still feeling them totally antiquated in a post-Portal/HL2/BioShock/Shadow of the Colossus/whathaveyou world.
I understand what you're saying in terms of imagination and projection, but it seems to me that JRPGs sort of get the worst of both worlds. If you want to project and imagine yourself being that character then western RPGs provide you with choices to make your control with, and therefore empathy for your protagonist infinitely stronger. If you want to just play through a game with an interesting character who isn't necessarily like you, then one would ask for much more complex and interesting protagonists than the big-haired boys we all have to deal with year after year (I am nothing like Solid Snake, for instance, but I still care about him a great deal).
"I hated RPGs when I was a kid because of the "shitty" combat system, but then I discovered something: they're a much better device for storytelling than any other genre, once you get over the less-directly-interactive hangup."
I'm not sure I understand -- JRPGs may include the most story, yes, but I don't really see how they're a better device for it. The story isn't developed in a really game-centric way -- reading a lot of text has since been replaced in this new generation with watching a lot of cutscenes -- and since your control over the characters is distant at best, one doesn't even get the sense of full interaction with and immersion in a story like you might with cripplingly cutscene-heavy games like MGS.
Dexter345:
Yeah, that's a flaw with the game. It should be much longer than it is, just to drive home the monotony.
lovemana23:
I'm not sure if I agree that "you either like and resonate with the aesthetic or you don't." I loved JRPGs when I was a kid, but now that I've got less time on my hands and a better understanding of how story can be conveyed through gameplay, I can respect how useful they once were while still feeling them totally antiquated in a post-Portal/HL2/BioShock/Shadow of the Colossus/whathaveyou world.
I understand what you're saying in terms of imagination and projection, but it seems to me that JRPGs sort of get the worst of both worlds. If you want to project and imagine yourself being that character then western RPGs provide you with choices to make your control with, and therefore empathy for your protagonist infinitely stronger. If you want to just play through a game with an interesting character who isn't necessarily like you, then one would ask for much more complex and interesting protagonists than the big-haired boys we all have to deal with year after year (I am nothing like Solid Snake, for instance, but I still care about him a great deal).
You know, OP, you should try reading some typical 19th century adventure stories or folktales, or really any hero story. Valdimir Propp came up with a list of about thirty narrative functions. Not all stories have all of them, but almost every popular narrative has at least a few and in the order that Propp provides them. Ok I'm kind of geeking out on literary criticism now, but your argument against the banality of the JRPG story is kind of pointless, as nearly all major stories follow a variation of a particular formula. Look up vladimir Propp's list of narrative functions, apply them to several really popular films or books, and you'll see that many, even most pop narratives are more or less very similar. This doesn't mean you can't enjoy them. There are some stories that have been around as long as people having been telling stories for a reason.
To your statement about JRPG's being nothing with the beautiful graphics, music, and sounds stripped down, etc. Well, duh, the gentle, emotive music of Nobuo Uematsu was probably the primary reason I loved Final Fantasy games. It's about the wonder of exploring a new world, of experiencing it first-hand, kind of.
I remember when I first played Dragon Quest. I was making my way to Alexandra and I had no idea how far I had to go. I was slowly dying and running out of supplies and MP, the sun had set so the really nasties had come out. The music swelled heroically, and I stepped forward, not knowing what I might encounter.
To your statement about JRPG's being nothing with the beautiful graphics, music, and sounds stripped down, etc. Well, duh, the gentle, emotive music of Nobuo Uematsu was probably the primary reason I loved Final Fantasy games. It's about the wonder of exploring a new world, of experiencing it first-hand, kind of.
I remember when I first played Dragon Quest. I was making my way to Alexandra and I had no idea how far I had to go. I was slowly dying and running out of supplies and MP, the sun had set so the really nasties had come out. The music swelled heroically, and I stepped forward, not knowing what I might encounter.
@lovemana23
Yes, this is exactly what I'm talking about stories that never die. Stories that always seem relevant.
@Burch
I defy you to say that FFVII,VIII, or X had "disposable" stories. Have you even played those games? How are they any more disposable than a story oriented mainly around serving the gameplay? Aren't those stories more "disposable" in a way, as they only serve to create gameplay? I mean I even enjoy those kind of games, but JRPGs (and some WRPGs) offer something more of a stand alone story.
Yes, this is exactly what I'm talking about stories that never die. Stories that always seem relevant.
@Burch
I defy you to say that FFVII,VIII, or X had "disposable" stories. Have you even played those games? How are they any more disposable than a story oriented mainly around serving the gameplay? Aren't those stories more "disposable" in a way, as they only serve to create gameplay? I mean I even enjoy those kind of games, but JRPGs (and some WRPGs) offer something more of a stand alone story.
In response to, like, half the people commenting:
I understand that most stories tend to be derived from the same 30 plots, but can you truly, with a straight face, insist that the vast majority of JRPGs don't tread the exact same ground in terms of structure and character and plot? Even something as silly and overblown as Metal Gear Solid still falls into the whole "something big is going to destroy the world and the protagonist has to stop it" structure, I'm not denying that. But good fiction, from any medium, makes itself feel fresh and interesting through the way it's told no matter how old its plot is (see: No Country for Old Men). That JRPGs have the same plot as so many other hero tales is not an excuse for their typically underwhelming execution.
This isn't going to be a terribly useful analogy for those of you who aren't familiar with Firefly or The Wire (to use a lowbrow and highbrow example), but those TV shows, flawed as they may be, only use up about 17 and 50 hours of your time, respectively. In those timeframes, which are pretty small compared to most JRPGs, you'll see character arcs change, plots develop and twist, and by the time you've reached the end you will find a climax that deserved 17 or 50 hours of buildup and journeying. JRPGs are often twice as long as stuff like this, yet they'll be lucky to effect even a fraction of that emotion or effectiveness.
Or, to beat a dead horse, the entire MGS series combined is about as long as Lost Odyssey and the ending of Lost Odyssey didn't have my friends and I literally jumping up and down, screaming at the screen.
Secondly, it's not true that when you reduce ANY game to its most basic forms, it will be boring no matter what. Mario is still about dexterity and hand-eye coordination, and making moment-to-moment choices. Shadow of the Colossus is still about puzzle-solving mixed with platforming, and, again, making important moment-to-moment choices.
JRPGs, with their emphasis on grinding, don't really get more complicated than finding out how to defeat a particularly difficult boss, and even those moments can and often are circumvented with some more mindless grinding. TLRPG is probably being unfair to JRPG combat by not including it at all, but the vast majority of RPG's I've played have involved not intelligent, strategic fighting of new and challenging foes, but of running through areas and randomly fighting multiple variants of the same dudes I'd been fighting since the very start of the game.
I will grant that Persona does have a very interesting core dynamic of time management and juggling duties, but I wish it wasn't so slavishly anchored to the afterschool Tartarus grindfest.
I understand that most stories tend to be derived from the same 30 plots, but can you truly, with a straight face, insist that the vast majority of JRPGs don't tread the exact same ground in terms of structure and character and plot? Even something as silly and overblown as Metal Gear Solid still falls into the whole "something big is going to destroy the world and the protagonist has to stop it" structure, I'm not denying that. But good fiction, from any medium, makes itself feel fresh and interesting through the way it's told no matter how old its plot is (see: No Country for Old Men). That JRPGs have the same plot as so many other hero tales is not an excuse for their typically underwhelming execution.
This isn't going to be a terribly useful analogy for those of you who aren't familiar with Firefly or The Wire (to use a lowbrow and highbrow example), but those TV shows, flawed as they may be, only use up about 17 and 50 hours of your time, respectively. In those timeframes, which are pretty small compared to most JRPGs, you'll see character arcs change, plots develop and twist, and by the time you've reached the end you will find a climax that deserved 17 or 50 hours of buildup and journeying. JRPGs are often twice as long as stuff like this, yet they'll be lucky to effect even a fraction of that emotion or effectiveness.
Or, to beat a dead horse, the entire MGS series combined is about as long as Lost Odyssey and the ending of Lost Odyssey didn't have my friends and I literally jumping up and down, screaming at the screen.
Secondly, it's not true that when you reduce ANY game to its most basic forms, it will be boring no matter what. Mario is still about dexterity and hand-eye coordination, and making moment-to-moment choices. Shadow of the Colossus is still about puzzle-solving mixed with platforming, and, again, making important moment-to-moment choices.
JRPGs, with their emphasis on grinding, don't really get more complicated than finding out how to defeat a particularly difficult boss, and even those moments can and often are circumvented with some more mindless grinding. TLRPG is probably being unfair to JRPG combat by not including it at all, but the vast majority of RPG's I've played have involved not intelligent, strategic fighting of new and challenging foes, but of running through areas and randomly fighting multiple variants of the same dudes I'd been fighting since the very start of the game.
I will grant that Persona does have a very interesting core dynamic of time management and juggling duties, but I wish it wasn't so slavishly anchored to the afterschool Tartarus grindfest.
FinalFist:
I'll bite -- Final Fantasies VII, VIII, and X had disposable stories.
Not just in that I didn't find them particularly well-written or dramatic (regardless of player involvement, if the ending to FFVII had filled me with anything other than satisfaction that I'd finally completed it, I would say it had a great story), but because they didn't fill that void by at least making me feel something for the characters through gameplay. The types of stories that DO aren't disposable, because they understand the strong bonds a player can develop with characters and ideas through gameplay alone. JRPGs seem to be frightened of this, so they have story and gameplay stand in very separate rooms and only ever talk to one another on special occasions (Aeris' death, for instance, is as affecting as it is at least partially because she was such a useful character to your party).
I'll bite -- Final Fantasies VII, VIII, and X had disposable stories.
Not just in that I didn't find them particularly well-written or dramatic (regardless of player involvement, if the ending to FFVII had filled me with anything other than satisfaction that I'd finally completed it, I would say it had a great story), but because they didn't fill that void by at least making me feel something for the characters through gameplay. The types of stories that DO aren't disposable, because they understand the strong bonds a player can develop with characters and ideas through gameplay alone. JRPGs seem to be frightened of this, so they have story and gameplay stand in very separate rooms and only ever talk to one another on special occasions (Aeris' death, for instance, is as affecting as it is at least partially because she was such a useful character to your party).
Also, Burch. Why would you call someone stupid for disagreeing with you? Isn't that kind of bad form?
I kind of think you deserve to be called out for presuming to basically condemn one of the most beloved and long-lasting genres in gaming.
I kind of think you deserve to be called out for presuming to basically condemn one of the most beloved and long-lasting genres in gaming.
Also, Burch. Why would you call someone stupid for disagreeing with you? Isn't that kind of bad form?
I kind of think you deserve to be called out for presuming to basically condemn one of the most beloved and long-lasting genres in gaming.
I kind of think you deserve to be called out for presuming to basically condemn one of the most beloved and long-lasting genres in gaming.
FinalFist:
I'm not calling you guys stupid -- you're defending your points well with logic. I'm calling Kia stupid, because she tends to repeatedly say stupid things with no backup other than "this is so not worth my time, you're SO smart (rolls eyes)." Which, after the third time, is nothing if not stupid.
I'm not calling you guys stupid -- you're defending your points well with logic. I'm calling Kia stupid, because she tends to repeatedly say stupid things with no backup other than "this is so not worth my time, you're SO smart (rolls eyes)." Which, after the third time, is nothing if not stupid.
@Anthony
Exactly, which was why I highlighted Persona 4, which makes about every possible iterative improvement. The plot is tightened up, the core mechanic is made more diverse, the characters more vibrant, and the grindfest changed up. You still explore dungeons, but this time each dungeon is vastly different in aesthetic, threat composition, and motivation.
In any case, because the majority of games in a given subgenre are poor doesn't mean it or the gems within should be done away with en masse. A huge majority of FPS games barely change in their game mechanics, but does that mean we don't deserve to play, say, Killzone 2?
I asked this in someone else's post a few weeks ago, but if we demanded that the wheel be reinvented every time, would we ever be able to find something that rolls properly?
Exactly, which was why I highlighted Persona 4, which makes about every possible iterative improvement. The plot is tightened up, the core mechanic is made more diverse, the characters more vibrant, and the grindfest changed up. You still explore dungeons, but this time each dungeon is vastly different in aesthetic, threat composition, and motivation.
In any case, because the majority of games in a given subgenre are poor doesn't mean it or the gems within should be done away with en masse. A huge majority of FPS games barely change in their game mechanics, but does that mean we don't deserve to play, say, Killzone 2?
I asked this in someone else's post a few weeks ago, but if we demanded that the wheel be reinvented every time, would we ever be able to find something that rolls properly?
I dunno how iteratively improved Persona 4 is -- or if it is, how much more it could be.
Like, I'm playing and using the (quite cool) weakness/knockdown mechanic to defeat enemies, but I find myself facing the exact same groups of enemies with the exact same weaknesses, which require the exact same strategies. The game's grindy-grindy nature still requires that I fight a buttload of them, but -- why? Each of them fights me in exactly the same way. If the game is going to put the enemies into repeated clusters, why not do something to cut down on the number of times I have to fight them? Why not, say, track whether or not I took any damage during a fight, and if I didn't -- if my strategy is rock solid -- why don't they make it so that if I face another one of those enemies, I can just skip the fight and get the XP since I've already proven I can kick their asses?
That, and it took literally three hours -- I timed it -- from putting in the game disc until I was allowed to actually control what I wanted to do because it was so full of exposition and other ugly stuff like that.
There's stuff about Persona 4 I really, really like, and that other people like as well, but what I find interesting is that most of that stuff is not even JRPG-esque! The social links system, the time management, job juggling -- none of that has any real roots in JRPGs to speak of, and that's what makes them so good. What JRPG conventions there ARE really hold the game back in many respects.
Like, I'm playing and using the (quite cool) weakness/knockdown mechanic to defeat enemies, but I find myself facing the exact same groups of enemies with the exact same weaknesses, which require the exact same strategies. The game's grindy-grindy nature still requires that I fight a buttload of them, but -- why? Each of them fights me in exactly the same way. If the game is going to put the enemies into repeated clusters, why not do something to cut down on the number of times I have to fight them? Why not, say, track whether or not I took any damage during a fight, and if I didn't -- if my strategy is rock solid -- why don't they make it so that if I face another one of those enemies, I can just skip the fight and get the XP since I've already proven I can kick their asses?
That, and it took literally three hours -- I timed it -- from putting in the game disc until I was allowed to actually control what I wanted to do because it was so full of exposition and other ugly stuff like that.
There's stuff about Persona 4 I really, really like, and that other people like as well, but what I find interesting is that most of that stuff is not even JRPG-esque! The social links system, the time management, job juggling -- none of that has any real roots in JRPGs to speak of, and that's what makes them so good. What JRPG conventions there ARE really hold the game back in many respects.
I dunno how iteratively improved Persona 4 is -- or if it is, how much more it could be.
Like, I'm playing and using the (quite cool) weakness/knockdown mechanic to defeat enemies, but I find myself facing the exact same groups of enemies with the exact same weaknesses, which require the exact same strategies. The game's grindy-grindy nature still requires that I fight a buttload of them, but -- why? Each of them fights me in exactly the same way. If the game is going to put the enemies into repeated clusters, why not do something to cut down on the number of times I have to fight them? Why not, say, track whether or not I took any damage during a fight, and if I didn't -- if my strategy is rock solid -- why don't they make it so that if I face another one of those enemies, I can just skip the fight and get the XP since I've already proven I can kick their asses?
That, and it took literally three hours -- I timed it -- from putting in the game disc until I was allowed to actually control what I wanted to do because it was so full of exposition and other ugly stuff like that.
There's stuff about Persona 4 I really, really like, and that other people like as well, but what I find interesting is that most of that stuff is not even JRPG-esque! The social links system, the time management, job juggling -- none of that has any real roots in JRPGs to speak of, and that's what makes them so good. What JRPG conventions there ARE really hold the game back in many respects.
Like, I'm playing and using the (quite cool) weakness/knockdown mechanic to defeat enemies, but I find myself facing the exact same groups of enemies with the exact same weaknesses, which require the exact same strategies. The game's grindy-grindy nature still requires that I fight a buttload of them, but -- why? Each of them fights me in exactly the same way. If the game is going to put the enemies into repeated clusters, why not do something to cut down on the number of times I have to fight them? Why not, say, track whether or not I took any damage during a fight, and if I didn't -- if my strategy is rock solid -- why don't they make it so that if I face another one of those enemies, I can just skip the fight and get the XP since I've already proven I can kick their asses?
That, and it took literally three hours -- I timed it -- from putting in the game disc until I was allowed to actually control what I wanted to do because it was so full of exposition and other ugly stuff like that.
There's stuff about Persona 4 I really, really like, and that other people like as well, but what I find interesting is that most of that stuff is not even JRPG-esque! The social links system, the time management, job juggling -- none of that has any real roots in JRPGs to speak of, and that's what makes them so good. What JRPG conventions there ARE really hold the game back in many respects.
I think the problem with most JRPGS is indeed grinding itself. For me, grinding isn't the objective of the gameplay, but really a cheat around it. When you play against enemies that are obviously stronger than you and can defeat you in a single turn, suddenly every move you make becomes momentously important. Grinding until your level is so ridiculous that you really don't have to even decide whether you're gonna use magic or physical attacks to wipe out your enemy breaks what would normally be an interesting fight.
I do agree though Anthony, I think JRPGs could tell their story a little more uniquely. It's why I really liked Persona 3, it had the same story as every other RPG, but it was told in a fresh way.
But Linear RPG was hilarious and awesome.
I do agree though Anthony, I think JRPGs could tell their story a little more uniquely. It's why I really liked Persona 3, it had the same story as every other RPG, but it was told in a fresh way.
But Linear RPG was hilarious and awesome.
I felt like you were making some really good points in the beginning of the article and I didn't want you to ruin RPG's for me so I never finished it. Sorry.
I've always been more a fan of shooters and more action oriented games, but RPG's are also a lot of fun if you're into it. Clearly, you aren't very into them, and that's your thing.
However, I think the one thing "The Linear RPG" probably overlooks that RPG's are known for is making you care about the characters. I've never cared about what happened to characters in film fiction as much as I cared about what happened to Cloud in FFVll when he was lost in the lifestream, or about character relationships as much as I did while play Star Ocean: Til the End of Time.
RPG's are, above anything, about the interactions between characters. Especially in the more modern era of games, characters are able to interact and create sub-plot lines on a level equal to that of not only the television shows you named, but various others. Whether the overarching story is impressive or not (admittedly, very few have been super high calibre) RPG's are about the events that occur throughout the game-not just the key points to comprise a plot summary.
But we all know RPG's have their niche. In fact...
http://project-apollo.net/text/rpg.html
However, I think the one thing "The Linear RPG" probably overlooks that RPG's are known for is making you care about the characters. I've never cared about what happened to characters in film fiction as much as I cared about what happened to Cloud in FFVll when he was lost in the lifestream, or about character relationships as much as I did while play Star Ocean: Til the End of Time.
RPG's are, above anything, about the interactions between characters. Especially in the more modern era of games, characters are able to interact and create sub-plot lines on a level equal to that of not only the television shows you named, but various others. Whether the overarching story is impressive or not (admittedly, very few have been super high calibre) RPG's are about the events that occur throughout the game-not just the key points to comprise a plot summary.
But we all know RPG's have their niche. In fact...
http://project-apollo.net/text/rpg.html
I've always been more a fan of shooters and more action oriented games, but RPG's are also a lot of fun if you're into it. Clearly, you aren't very into them, and that's your thing.
However, I think the one thing "The Linear RPG" probably overlooks that RPG's are known for is making you care about the characters. I've never cared about what happened to characters in film fiction as much as I cared about what happened to Cloud in FFVll when he was lost in the lifestream, or about character relationships as much as I did while play Star Ocean: Til the End of Time.
RPG's are, above anything, about the interactions between characters. Especially in the more modern era of games, characters are able to interact and create sub-plot lines on a level equal to that of not only the television shows you named, but various others. Whether the overarching story is impressive or not (admittedly, very few have been super high calibre) RPG's are about the events that occur throughout the game-not just the key points to comprise a plot summary.
But we all know RPG's have their niche. In fact...
http://project-apollo.net/text/rpg.html
However, I think the one thing "The Linear RPG" probably overlooks that RPG's are known for is making you care about the characters. I've never cared about what happened to characters in film fiction as much as I cared about what happened to Cloud in FFVll when he was lost in the lifestream, or about character relationships as much as I did while play Star Ocean: Til the End of Time.
RPG's are, above anything, about the interactions between characters. Especially in the more modern era of games, characters are able to interact and create sub-plot lines on a level equal to that of not only the television shows you named, but various others. Whether the overarching story is impressive or not (admittedly, very few have been super high calibre) RPG's are about the events that occur throughout the game-not just the key points to comprise a plot summary.
But we all know RPG's have their niche. In fact...
http://project-apollo.net/text/rpg.html
@Anthony: If it's the art and the cultural specifics you dig, don't you wish they were attached to a type of game with a not-disposable story and not potentially irritating grinding?
Unfortunately, like most things, this issue boils down to personal taste. I don't find the grinding irritating most of the time...I find it very relaxing, actually. As for a non-disposable story? I can usually take or leave a story for most games...in the vast majority of cases the story exists to justify the gameplay.
Don't get me wrong...a good story is greatly appreciated (Persona 4, Bioshock, Half Life 2). It just happens so infrequently that there's no point highlighting JRPGs faults in that area. All genres are guilty of abusing the same old story that works best for them...JRPGs are just more honest about it. They don't try to disguise the fact that they are abusing clichés. I don't hear anyone crowing about the uniqueness of stories in Halo 3 or Gears of War 2, no matter how much the developers puff out their chests or try to throw in largely cosmetic twists.
The only MAJOR gripe I have about JRPGs is the 'save whenever we say you can' mechanic. As an adult gamer (with a life, kids and all of the other fun stuff), I find the fact I can't stop whenever I want extremely irritating. That is why I'm picking up a DSi when they come stateside.
Unfortunately, like most things, this issue boils down to personal taste. I don't find the grinding irritating most of the time...I find it very relaxing, actually. As for a non-disposable story? I can usually take or leave a story for most games...in the vast majority of cases the story exists to justify the gameplay.
Don't get me wrong...a good story is greatly appreciated (Persona 4, Bioshock, Half Life 2). It just happens so infrequently that there's no point highlighting JRPGs faults in that area. All genres are guilty of abusing the same old story that works best for them...JRPGs are just more honest about it. They don't try to disguise the fact that they are abusing clichés. I don't hear anyone crowing about the uniqueness of stories in Halo 3 or Gears of War 2, no matter how much the developers puff out their chests or try to throw in largely cosmetic twists.
The only MAJOR gripe I have about JRPGs is the 'save whenever we say you can' mechanic. As an adult gamer (with a life, kids and all of the other fun stuff), I find the fact I can't stop whenever I want extremely irritating. That is why I'm picking up a DSi when they come stateside.
follow
