Natural Hazard:
why are people so keen to kick of about linearilty these days, it has its place. God even some of the best games are linear, most of the time the fact that the game is open-ended for some means a huge world with fuck all going off. That being said i enjoy western rpgs, no matter how tiresome and annoying they can get also. Yes i do RP before people kick of and say "Well you can do this and that etc etc in WRPGS"

Ah, that's what I forgot. Adding to the feeling of being in a book, both Icewind Dale games are pretty strictly linear, with minor deviations here and there, but none (AFAIK) with much long-term effect.

FF7 didn't create the cliches. They were cliched before it. The characters in FF7 were anime steroetypes created in the 50's. Not saying the characters arn't iconic....just that they didn't start the cliches. Granted how many people cosplay as them? They almost are as popular as Link and Mario at times.

VRaptorX:
FF7 didn't create the cliches. They were cliched before it. The characters in FF7 were anime steroetypes created in the 50's. Not saying the characters arn't iconic....just that they didn't start the cliches. Granted how many people cosplay as them? They almost are as popular as Link and Mario at times.

We know it didn't create the cliches, but you need to take into account in terms of being westernly popular, FF7 started it, that is something that deserves to be respected. Hell god nos how the western world would take JRPGS nowadays if FF7 never had the effect that it did.

OK...now I get what you were saying. I thought you wer suggesting that FF7 started the cliches. Alright...miscommunication.

And there would be a JRPG somewhere down the line that would make RPGs popular. If not FF7 than something else with a huge marketting campaign. FF7 just became the first because of the HUGE marketting campaign showing off the FMVs. Everyone had to buy it for that. It's a major success in marketting. Man...Sony actually made good commercials back then. Much better than the whole crying baby PS3 commercial.

VRaptorX:
OK...games before FF7 eh? FF6 had a death of General Leo and possibly Shadow if you choose to (and multiple love interests by Kefka...thus furthering my point that FF7 is just 6 in 3D and to a lesser extreme). FF5 had someone die to cast the ultimate magic....sound familiar...and that attack did absolutly nothing to the villian. Aerith's death was just bits and peices of every other FF death before it.

My point was never that FFVII did it in a way that was better than anything before, merely that it was the game that introduced that kind of emotional connection to (a) a new audience, and (b) a new generation of gamers. Excluding "hardcore" gamers, do you really think many people played FFV or FFVI?

Man_In_Gauze:
Just go play System Shock 2, all of you. :P

And for those Baldur's Gate fans, try to pick up a copy of Icewind Dale I and II. It's more action-oriented than dialogue compared to BG, but the balance works out excellently, and it's a blast to play.

Although I have never actually played Baldur's Gate...I really want to. As soon as I finish IWD2.

You don't really have to worry about connecting with the characters in that game, because you are the characters. It's sort of like how you develop an attachment to each of the members of a group in a fantasy book, except this book starts out with a pre-written plot and you can make the characters yourself. It also gives you a good feeling of advancement; in the beginning of the game you feel like big-shots clearing out caves full of orcs and winning the adulation of the townspeople, but then strange things start happening, and you find yourself without a mentor or any way to plan out what to do; you just fall back on your swords and spells and end up talking with the minibosses and gleaning information from them before you fight. As the game goes on, the character who gives out your quests and such usually starts relying on you instead of vice versa; he tells you to go somewhere, you go in, talk to the baddies, get whatever information you can, then kill them all and come home (the option to talk one out of a fight happens fairly often, but always unexpectedly) to tell the boss what you know before. It really, for me, does the best job so far of capturing the true spirit of adventuring in a fantasy setting, especially demonstrating how it would feel to be an actual part of *insert Forgotten Realms novel here*. Speaking of which, if you read The Icewind Dale Trilogy by R.A. Salvatore, I doubly urge you to pick up at least Icewind Dale 1, as it is tied into the above books in everything but characters (taking place something like 60 years before the books do)

So, yeah. I love WRPGs, especially the Baldur's Gate-esque ones.

If you have a sec, read through the posts between Razzle Bathbone and me. The divide comes down a lot to how much of an internal imaginative leap you want to make in order to "complete" your character. In any Western RPG (excluding, maybe, Mass Effect) the reasoning behind decisions is entirely on the side of the player. So, while you can say (to yourself) the reason I killed that guy was because... It doesn't have any influence on the game (aside from that you killed him). The decisions are far more open-ended, but the character is less flushed-out in the game itself.

There does tend to be a dearth of WRPGs which aren't swords-and-horses fantasy. Mass Effect, System Shock, KOTOR. Once you've beaten those, it becomes a choice between JRPGs and "there's an ultimate evil in an ancient land/olde England, go to work". I'm going to make the reverse suggestion. Check out Disgaea, Final Fantasy Tactics, Final Fantasy six, seven, ten, or twelve, or Dragonwarrior. Really give it a chance, instead of dismissing it immediately as a linear JRPG.

sinfulfate:

The best thing about Western rpgs is that the experience differs depending on the player. If you got 5 guys together who just beat Mass Effect and they were discussing the game they all who have done things differently in game. Someone might have went paragraon, someone might have only had 4 party members, someone might have got a different ending; someone might hve upgraded his/her class, etc(I don't want to spoil the game). With a JRPG the experience is set by the developer so every player who beat FF VII gets the same experience. Bottom line is that JPRGS are insanely linear and Western RPGS are more open ended.

Define why that's the "best thing" or even a "good thing" aside from personal taste, if you would. When did linearity become a bad thing? When did different endings, and everyone getting an individualized experience become the shibboleth for a good game?

Ha ok. When I read the thread subject I thought you meant "Emotions of the actual characters in JRPGs". I was going to say:

Two emotions: >_< and "0_o

ha! [and back to our scheduled broadcasting]

Razzle Bathbone:

Seldon2639:
I don't mind my actions not doing anything other than propelling the story forward, because I don't see myself as ever being part of the game. Ask the same question of people who like Halo, or Bioshock

Halo doesn't claim to be an RPG. Bioshock does, and I've avoided it for that reason. It's obviously an FPS with a few stats.

I wonder if a term like "plot-based shooter" would be more accurate. It would probably depend on whether the game was really intended to be played through with the plot, or if the plot was basically just thrown in to support the obligatory single-player mode.

Seldon2639:
if you've read the Harry Dresden books, maybe you could help me out. I've been trying to tweak the Mage system from Whitewolf for a game based on the books, rather than wait for the real RPG to come out. I could use GURPS, but this seems more grounded. Any ideas?

You might try "Authentic Thaumaturgy" by Isaac Bonewits. It's a generic magic system that could fit into GURPS or the Storyteller system, from a modern occultist's point of view. I've never read the Dresden books, but if a "realistic" occult feel is what you're after, that's the best sourcebook I know of. Plus the author has some entertaining rants about magic stuff.

Let me know how it turns out.

Seldon2639:
There does tend to be a dearth of WRPGs which aren't swords-and-horses fantasy. Mass Effect, System Shock, KOTOR. Once you've beaten those, it becomes a choice between JRPGs and "there's an ultimate evil in an ancient land/olde England, go to work".

Dude! You're a White Wolf fan and you haven't played Vampire: the Masquerade - Bloodlines yet? You've gotta play it! It's only twenty bucks on Steam! Do it! Do it now!

Your point is well taken, though. Not a lot of others apart from the ones you mentioned. Morrowind's fantasy world felt very alien and different from your typical western swords&horses fare, which is why a lot of us were kinda disappointed with Oblivion's more generic look and feel.

And I'm not going to mention Deus Ex, because it's pretty much a stealth-shooter with stats and experience points. Even though it's awesome. (The original, that is. Not the sequel.)

Seldon2639:
There does tend to be a dearth of WRPGs which aren't swords-and-horses fantasy. Mass Effect, System Shock, KOTOR. Once you've beaten those, it becomes a choice between JRPGs and "there's an ultimate evil in an ancient land/olde England, go to work".

That's one of the reasons why I liked Jade Empire so much, even if it was sort of KOTORiental.

Razzle Bathbone:

And I'm not going to mention Deus Ex, because it's pretty much a stealth-shooter with stats and experience points. Even though it's awesome. (The original, that is. Not the sequel.)

I think they have that for free on GameTap right now, that and Psychonauts. If Okami shows up there, you'll hear me squeeing here to Tokyo.

Razzle Bathbone:

And I'm not going to mention Deus Ex, because it's pretty much a stealth-shooter with stats and experience points. Even though it's awesome. (The original, that is. Not the sequel.)

And yet it is a more authentic 'RPG' than just about any JRPG or some western ones I could name. The primary thing it has in common with shooters is the interface. It has multiple endings, multiple ways to approach the problems contained therein and the story changes significantly based upon conscious decisions made by the player.

Razzle Bathbone:

Seldon2639:
There does tend to be a dearth of WRPGs which aren't swords-and-horses fantasy. Mass Effect, System Shock, KOTOR. Once you've beaten those, it becomes a choice between JRPGs and "there's an ultimate evil in an ancient land/olde England, go to work".

Dude! You're a White Wolf fan and you haven't played Vampire: the Masquerade - Bloodlines yet? You've gotta play it! It's only twenty bucks on Steam! Do it! Do it now!

Your point is well taken, though. Not a lot of others apart from the ones you mentioned. Morrowind's fantasy world felt very alien and different from your typical western swords&horses fare, which is why a lot of us were kinda disappointed with Oblivion's more generic look and feel.

And I'm not going to mention Deus Ex, because it's pretty much a stealth-shooter with stats and experience points. Even though it's awesome. (The original, that is. Not the sequel.)

I've played it, and I liked it, and it was certainly better than the other game they tried to base on Whitewolf RPGs (Hunter, the something). But, it loses something for me because I've played the games with actual other people. Actually, the best Whitewolf game I can think of to make an RPG of would be Orpheus.

ReepNeep:

And yet [Deus Ex] is a more authentic 'RPG' than just about any JRPG or some western ones I could name. The primary thing it has in common with shooters is the interface. It has multiple endings, multiple ways to approach the problems contained therein and the story changes significantly based upon conscious decisions made by the player.

Welcome to the argument of what constitutes an "authentic RPG". I'm, personally, more interface oriented. I like turn-based battles, and it's pretty rare for me to really like an FPS/RPG (Mass Effect). When the RPG elements (stats, ect.) seem tacked on at the end, it's less fun. The issue with saying Deux Ex is closer to an "authentic RPG" based on multiple endings, paths, ect. is that we can debate whether those make for an "authentic RPG".

So apparently there are only two types of RPGs: JRPGs and non-J RPGs. Um, if you're going to compare the RPGs of one single country to the RPGs of the entire rest of the world (all of which get classified under the amorphous blanket title "Western RPGs"), of course you're going to "find" that WRPGs have more variety.

tiredinnuendo:
I have a great deal of trouble recognizing "western" as a valid subclass of RPGs unless you're using it as a way of saying "not JRPGs". JRPGs tend to follow the same plotlines, stereotypes, and styles because that's Japanese culture, but to compare something like Fallout to something like Morrowind to something like Mass Effect and say that they're all in the same category.... hm.... they're pretty much completely different games.

I agree 100%, and am a little disappointed that even Yahtzee is guilty of this. Come to think of it, I probably should have mentioned this in the comments thread on his Mass Effect review...

the whole context of genres has been thrown out of proportion, all you can do is sterotype unless you want to sit there listing all the games that did something different from the majority, not particular great when u want to write a review or an article. However One thing is in the majority of western RPGs like Morrowind and well ok mass effect etc all have, open-ending gameplay/elements e.g planets in mass effect, world in morrowind etc etc. That is just generalising however and sometimes its the only thing you can do. JRPGS however are mainly linear key word being "Mainly there"

But.. Generally when someone says Western RPGS they generally mean open-ending gameplay, character customization etc
Mass effect is an action RPG, still western but i feel better calling it that.

Hey, this is my first post here. The direction this discussion is going speaks to my interests, so I just had to delurk for this.

Seldon2639:
Welcome to the argument of what constitutes an "authentic RPG". I'm, personally, more interface oriented. I like turn-based battles, and it's pretty rare for me to really like an FPS/RPG (Mass Effect). When the RPG elements (stats, ect.) seem tacked on at the end, it's less fun. The issue with saying Deux Ex is closer to an "authentic RPG" based on multiple endings, paths, ect. is that we can debate whether those make for an "authentic RPG".

There's an issue here because "RPG" as a term is very divergent.

I'm going to say "roleplaying" in air quotes a lot. When I say that I usually mean "what the average D&D player would call roleplaying." Not derisively but just to emphasize that it's ambiguously defined even within the pen-and-paper RPG community, though also a term that's idiosyncratic to that community.

...

Here's my weird way of looking at it...

D&D was the original "roleplaying game." The system in D&D, especially early D&D, is pretty much a skirmish wargaming system. Turning the game tokens into full-on characters with personalities and motivations is an example of transformative play (akin to, say, speed runs or character-acting "roleplaying" in an fantasy MMOG). This stuff that pen-and-paper gamers call "roleplaying" -- chiefly in-character dialogue and paying some attention to the fictional persona's motivations, with elements of big-picture storytelling as well -- wasn't really directly supported by the rules, but the games were bendy enough that almost everybody started doing it. Over time, pen-and-paper RPGs became all about the shared fiction of play. The community was somewhat antagonistic towards players who didn't adopt the "roleplaying" style, and video-game wargaming really did a much better job of offering little tactical battles than RPG systems did.

The rules, however, didn't change all that much. Even the White Wolf games of the early 90s, which are notable for popularizing a certain outlook on RPG-as-storytelling, use a stats-and-skills-and-special-rules-for-combat system not too different from D&D or CRPGs (and they have a similar XP-driven zero-to-hero bildungsroman approach to character development).

In my opinion, there's a huge gap between the rules in the book and the techniques employed by the group during play. Simply put, I think most of the rules do absolutely nothing to help "roleplaying" or the creation of shared narrative. This is a somewhat controversial thing to say. (Usually on a pen-and-paper RPG forum you'll get responses like "You don't need rules for roleplaying!")

Anyway, that's a really long-winded way of saying that most pen-and-paper gamers -- and most of their gaming books, too -- use "roleplaying" to refer to a set of stuff that's pretty much completely independent of system.

Many also think of all RPGs as being defined by experience points and Strength scores and GMs and task-resolution rules systems. They just take all that stuff for granted because that's pretty much the paradigm that all the big commercially-successful-in-their-own-niche-market pen-and-paper RPGs have followed. D&D, GURPS, WoD, WFRP, Palladium, whatever... that's not to say they're all the same, but they're all designed around a very similar set of central assumptions.

...

Video-game RPGs like Baldur's Gate can emulate the rules in a game book pretty well. The RPG genre of video games -- both Western and Japanese -- largely started out aping D&D, after all. Many RPG video games also try to emulate the experience of playing in a tabletop RPG game, e.g. by using scripted branching dialog in place of talking to a GM.

But there are big commercially-successful video games that don't use a D&D-style system but still have all kinds of cool story stuff happening. They still end up channeling a bit of the experience of "roleplaying" in a D&D game without using D&D-like rules.

So, video games have done a better job of disentangling the narrative techniques that define "roleplaying" from the other stuff they're just sitting on top of (like Strength scores and experience points), I guess. At least if you focus just on games that are well-known and mainstream in their respective markets.

(The skills system in Deus Ex definitely felt tacked-on to me, though. That's why I actually prefer the gameplay in its sequel, Invisible War -- even though that game is, overall, weaker.)

-- Alex

VRaptorX:
I always hear people say how much better Western RPGs are. I just don't get it. I mean...I'm just going to do "fetch quest #1028266, and "clean out dungeon #12532829 over and over again. Yeah...take this to teh town...OK....now I'm starting to get a bit bored.....OK and....I did that for a slightly less powerful shield than the one I already have? You mean I've spent all these hours doing absolutly nothing to move the plot foward? I understand freeroaming but come on, this has gone beyond pointless. Anyone else feel this way?

I mean...yeah whoop dee doo an evil religious figurehead is summoning X monster to destroy world and only a group of 25 year olds at the oldest can save the world is a bit cliched but at least when I play for five hours I actually have an emotional attachment to these characters. I hate some, love others (be that what the devs wanted or not). But in a Western RPG...I can't even quarentee that I'll even know the characters freaking name yet because I'd be so lost fetching a cow for a farmer 20 minutes of horseback riding away in hopes that one of these 30 tasks given to me will let me hear the backstory of the world, villian, problem, something.

Im sorry but when you say western RPGs i think of deus ex, fallout or system shock so i dont really understand your points,

If by "emotion" you mean spikey haired protagonists, then no.

I stopped playing JPRGs after the '90s. FFVI, Chrono Trigger, Final Fantasy Tactics. That's about it. There are some real gems, but they're so steeped in stereotypes lately that it's hard to stomach.

Western RPGs have been my preference for the past 8 years or so, beginning with Icewind Dale & BG2. It probably has something to do with me never owning a Playstation. *roll eyes for effect*

sammyfreak:
But unlike the FF games, stuff like Mass Effect makes me silently mourn at times. Even Oblivion (No, seriously) made me feel more attached to the world around me then most JRPGs.

Also, FFX has the worst two protagonists in the history of media.

Hear hear. I note the diary of Viranus Donton and conversing with the Rachni Queen as two of my most touching moments in gaming.

J-RPGs can have the same effect, but the problem is that the characters involved are for the most part unlikeable twat-mouths. Also, jumping up and down and pointing at the Aeris scene while screaming like an intoxicated gibbon proves my point; you found but one emotional scene in the genre.

Ok....

1) when I say emotion....I do NOT mean spiky hair amnesia cliches.

2) yes....there are a lot of annoying characters in JRPGs (Collette and Genis comes to mind instantly), but at least they have character. Some Western RPGs don't even give the character a single line of words. granted Mass Effect is obviously different but some non-JRPGs just go, "OK here's a stat sheet. You have no real reason or motivation to save the world, nor do you have any interest in any other character or development of any kind." How am I suppossed to feel for someone who's basically just an emotionless being of nothingness.

Copter400:

sammyfreak:
But unlike the FF games, stuff like Mass Effect makes me silently mourn at times. Even Oblivion (No, seriously) made me feel more attached to the world around me then most JRPGs.

Also, FFX has the worst two protagonists in the history of media.

Hear hear. I note the diary of Viranus Donton and conversing with the Rachni Queen as two of my most touching moments in gaming.

J-RPGs can have the same effect, but the problem is that the characters involved are for the most part unlikeable twat-mouths. Also, jumping up and down and pointing at the Aeris scene while screaming like an intoxicated gibbon proves my point; you found but one emotional scene in the genre.

As I've mentioned elsewhere, FFIX has a scene that I thought was incredibly touching (wherein your party's Black Mage watches a group of his fellow Black Mages getting destroyed by an even more powerful Black Mage). The fact that people jump up and down pointing at the Aeris scene isn't because it's the only emotional scene in the genre, it's because it's become the scene people associate with emotion in games.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

Copter400:

sammyfreak:
But unlike the FF games, stuff like Mass Effect makes me silently mourn at times. Even Oblivion (No, seriously) made me feel more attached to the world around me then most JRPGs.

Also, FFX has the worst two protagonists in the history of media.

Hear hear. I note the diary of Viranus Donton and conversing with the Rachni Queen as two of my most touching moments in gaming.

J-RPGs can have the same effect, but the problem is that the characters involved are for the most part unlikeable twat-mouths. Also, jumping up and down and pointing at the Aeris scene while screaming like an intoxicated gibbon proves my point; you found but one emotional scene in the genre.

As I've mentioned elsewhere, FFIX has a scene that I thought was incredibly touching (wherein your party's Black Mage watches a group of his fellow Black Mages getting destroyed by an even more powerful Black Mage). The fact that people jump up and down pointing at the Aeris scene isn't because it's the only emotional scene in the genre, it's because it's become the scene people associate with emotion in games.

That scene (the Black Mage scene) was so beautifully shot. if you did not feel something watching that, check your heart to make sure it isn't stone.

Is enchanted arms western or not i cant tell.
Either way is horrible.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

Copter400:

sammyfreak:
But unlike the FF games, stuff like Mass Effect makes me silently mourn at times. Even Oblivion (No, seriously) made me feel more attached to the world around me then most JRPGs.

Also, FFX has the worst two protagonists in the history of media.

Hear hear. I note the diary of Viranus Donton and conversing with the Rachni Queen as two of my most touching moments in gaming.

J-RPGs can have the same effect, but the problem is that the characters involved are for the most part unlikeable twat-mouths. Also, jumping up and down and pointing at the Aeris scene while screaming like an intoxicated gibbon proves my point; you found but one emotional scene in the genre.

As I've mentioned elsewhere, FFIX has a scene that I thought was incredibly touching (wherein your party's Black Mage watches a group of his fellow Black Mages getting destroyed by an even more powerful Black Mage). The fact that people jump up and down pointing at the Aeris scene isn't because it's the only emotional scene in the genre, it's because it's become the scene people associate with emotion in games.

Yer that was upsetting, thats why FF9 even though underated is one of the best games of the series.

VRaptorX:
2) yes....there are a lot of annoying characters in JRPGs (Collette and Genis comes to mind instantly), but at least they have character. Some Western RPGs don't even give the character a single line of words. granted Mass Effect is obviously different but some non-JRPGs just go, "OK here's a stat sheet. You have no real reason or motivation to save the world, nor do you have any interest in any other character or development of any kind." How am I suppossed to feel for someone who's basically just an emotionless being of nothingness.

Can you cite some examples, please? (It's not that I don't believe you -- it's just hard to be sure what you're talking about without specifics. Gold Box games? Diablo? Who knows?)

-- Alex

Diablo 2 did have a big problem with "why am I here" syndrome. I'm going...OK...just why do I want to defeat baal again? OK...he's the badguy....and what am I? A mercenary? A secret alliance member sent in? Just some random villager who decided to learn magic? I can choose my class, skills, etc but I can't find out my motivation? Apparently every villager trusts me with quests and are willing to tell their life's story to me....but why? Why do they trust me? What's my past with these people?

I think the only silent character to ever have a personality is gordan freeman....and that's because the other characters all say stories about what he did when we arn't playing him. We have an understanding as to what type of person he is.

Sylocat:
So apparently there are only two types of RPGs: JRPGs and non-J RPGs. Um, if you're going to compare the RPGs of one single country to the RPGs of the entire rest of the world (all of which get classified under the amorphous blanket title "Western RPGs"), of course you're going to "find" that WRPGs have more variety.

tiredinnuendo:
I have a great deal of trouble recognizing "western" as a valid subclass of RPGs unless you're using it as a way of saying "not JRPGs". JRPGs tend to follow the same plotlines, stereotypes, and styles because that's Japanese culture, but to compare something like Fallout to something like Morrowind to something like Mass Effect and say that they're all in the same category.... hm.... they're pretty much completely different games.

I agree 100%, and am a little disappointed that even Yahtzee is guilty of this. Come to think of it, I probably should have mentioned this in the comments thread on his Mass Effect review...

I find your logic to be lacking. You can't complain that it lacks nuance to lump all non-JRPGs into one grouping, while saying that all JRPGs follow the same plotlines, stereotypes, and styles. Compare the world of FFVII with FFXII, or both of them with X. Then compare those to the Dragonwarrior games. Take those comparisons, and compare them to Disgaea. I'll agree that there are going to be thematic similarities. But, come on, every RPG is going to end up as "there's an evil being/entity/event which is going to destroy the world/kill you horrifically/do something else bad and which you alone are qualified to defeat because of a prophecy/you're in an unique position/you have greater powers than most and will be set in the ancient world/the future/contemporarily, but with something big changed/a different universe altogether." There's a reason Baldur's gate, Ultima, Morrowind, and Elder Scrolls all play like a JRR Tolkien story.

So, yes, we can avoid lumping games in together, but then you need to differentiate between different JRPGs as well. In the same way Oblivion is different from Baldur's Gate, most of the Final Fantasy games are different from each other, and certainly from other games in that general classification.

By the way, can we get the hell over the spikey hair? I get that it's not natural and annoying, and maybe even juvenile, but are we really so shallow that *that's* going to be a sticking point?