All JRPG needs to be liked again is to be gritty.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT
 

At this late stage the people who're still holding a candle for the Japanese video game industry remind me strongly of children who're convinced that they can get their divorced parents back together again. Western games were never popular in Japan. The tastes of mainstream gamers in the West have moved from the period that they overlapped with what was being released by the Japanese industry.

Just accept that it's over already, then move on.

Paradoxrifts:
At this late stage the people who're still holding a candle for the Japanese video game industry remind me strongly of children who're convinced that they can get their divorced parents back together again. Western games were never popular in Japan. The tastes of mainstream gamers in the West have moved from the period that they overlapped with what was being released by the Japanese industry.

Just accept that it's over already, then move on.

So, which Japanese gamemakers are posting losses like EA, or going bankrupt like THQ? Because I can't think of any, and it's really making me scratch my head every time people talk about gloom and doom for JRPGs. Everyone keeps saying they're on the decline, but I can't see it. All I see is more people than ever before telling me I need to play games like Persona and Professor Layton and Catherine.

EDIT: It seems in the early morning haze of my mind I may have misread this. Now I see you're saying that "it's over" in regards to western and Japanese games having a lot in common. Never mind then, my bad~

The Wykydtron:

Padwolf:
I play JRPG's because they are not gritty and are far from it. The only problem I have with JRPG's is the characters. Keep in mind that all this is really my opinion. Take Chie from Persona 4. At the moment I cannot stand her, she is one of the most annoying characters I have ever come across. I hope she gets better, I'm only a few hours in, just started playing yesterday. Another set of annoying characters would be the two kids in Lost Odyssey. Yes they come from a tragic moment and all that jazz but they were still highly annoying. The same with Final Fantasy games; Vaan in Final Fantasy 12, many of the characters in FF13. And a lot of the time I do not enjoy the whole "strong and silent and broody type" hero's. JRPG's don't need to be grittier, the reason I play them is because they are not gritty. I didn't even know that they weren't liked, I thought they were loved just as much as any other type of game.

Edit: Hold the phone. Go and play Lost Odyssey, OP. Go and play that and come back to me and tell me it was childish. Oh and Bastion. Go and give that a whirl too. And a load of others I can list that don't have much political intrigue and yet are still part of my list of favourite games

O MAI GAWD!

Padding! When did you start playing my #1 favourite game of all time?! PS2 or Vita re-release? Have you gotten to the first proper dungeon yet? (because the first 1 and a half/2 hours is literally scrolling text and dialogue choices peppered with save points, it's fucking hype) and goddammit everyone is supposed to love Chie! She's adorable :3

Anyway people typically complain more about Yosuke. He's kind of a dick sometimes.

I didn't even have to nag you into it. I now just need Rookie to stop creating shitty puns and actually play the damn thing.

"Lol Shitsona 4!"

Best jokes EU

I only started playing it about two days ago. It's the original PS2 version :D I'm still not very far in D: not even at the first dungeon! I don't know, I just find Chie to be a bit too abbrasive and just plain annoying with it. I think Yosuke is alright though :D It is a good game, I should play more of it today :D You should nag Rookie into it, it is really good

Padwolf:

I only started playing it about two days ago. It's the original PS2 version :D I'm still not very far in D: not even at the first dungeon! I don't know, I just find Chie to be a bit too abbrasive and just plain annoying with it. I think Yosuke is alright though :D It is a good game, I should play more of it today :D You should nag Rookie into it, it is really good

*Best Jayce impression*

Cannag, engaged!

All I can say with Chie is, THINGS HAPPEN! COOL THINGS! WITH CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT AND SHIT!

So hype

No.

What JRPG's REALLY need in order to stop sucking is to stop being about androgynous teenagers of ambiguous genders, stupid hairdos and wangst (look it up). Like what Final Fantasy was before it hit 7.

gyrobot:
Well lets think for a moment why people hates JRPGs? Because it doesn't fit the current standards expected by the current attitude towards the fantasy genre.

But what do people expect from the fantasy genre now? To emulate ASOIAF, the political intrigue, the brutal cynicism and ultimately be as mature as possible. The funny thing is that JRPGs at one point was like that with Ogre Battle, Valkyrie Profile and Xenogears which served as the greats of JRPG. When JRPGs made the shift to making stuff lighter in content, WRPGs picked the ball up, using ASOIAF rather than Tolkien as their inspiration and has sold well compared to JRPGs which is becoming mostly kiddier.

So for JRPGs to be liked again, I recommend tossing in a bit of ASOIAF, some mature content and call us in the morning. We will dismiss the Turn Based stuff as part the genetic makeup of the genre. But the childishness is a disease that needs to be cured

I disagree, I think the 'childishness' as you put it is what is at the heart of JRPGs, although I'd say it's more of an innocence. And no, I'm not talking about Vaan. Zidane (FF9) for example is a lighthearted character who is a lot of fun to play as.

I don't think JRPGs are built to portray 'gritty'. It's just a recipe for failure to even try.

Xenogears one of the greats? I think everyone forgets how the quality of that game dips down greatly at the 3/4ths mark of the 1st disc when they ran out of budget. Then the rest of the game became walls of text.

OT:
Better JRPGs? Stop with the bullshit melodrama with emo protagonists who are incredible fighters but "I'm ...No hero" because they couldn't save some person once but have been saving people endlessly since. Cloud comes to mind, he was not emo in Final Fantasy VII,but after FFVII? He turned into the typical jackass I hate of JRPGs, in Advent Children & those crappy Kingdom Hearts fanservice games & Dissidia literally saying "I'm no hero". He beat so many bad dudes, killed a false God and kept most of his friends alive, he IS a hero it makes no fucking sense.

I just started playing Grandia off the PSN, that game has been the best "new" JRPG I've played in ages. Granted I'm 3 hours in but it has charm, the characters are fun, the battles are neat and this game seems to be devoid of the emo streak.

All of the nope, I can muster, dood...
Not just because JRPGs are my favourite genre, but the general idea that anything needs to be Gritty to be good or even dark
Also "Childishess is a disease that needs to be cured"? Wow, you must be new to this whole gaming thing huh~
Allow me to direct you to the Kirby series, one of the most "Childish-esk games around, all of which HAVE AN ADRITCH ABOMINATION FOR A FINAL BOSS!
Childishness & Dark Plots go hand in hand, dood
The childishness makes the darker points mean just that much more & the dark points make the Childishness all the more enticing
JRPGs have always been, primiarly about story, see the fact most of the people like Square & the like made Visual Novels before going into JRPGs, Visual Novels being a genre in which there is nothing but story
...
Wow, I'm dragging random info together to try and make a sound point, dood XP
Though I do believe Jim actually did an episode on this sorta subject & its says it better than I can, so go watch that, then slap yourself

i still like the games from japan and if they change to be more like some of the ones over here I'll have even more money and less games to get

Just adding grittiness does not necessarily improve a piece of media. And neither does making it more upbeat. What matters is the quality of the product in question (let's face it, that is what media is in the end). In the case of a game, this tends to be about the enjoyability of its gameplay, and how good its story is, as well as how expertly that story is told and executed. Good characterisation is part of this. The story aspect can be completely ignored with certain types of games, but with RPGs, it's a necessity.
In short: JRPGs need to be just straight up better.

If there's anything that JRPGs need, it's to stop trying so hard to be 'cool and edgy' and start trying to have interesting characters, with believable arcs, with an interesting settings, and more motivated villains and less 'Saturday-morning cartoon' villains. As it stands right now, it's the characters and tones that need the most work.

I just started playing FFV, and already I'm enjoying it more than most JRPGs I've played in recent memory. Why? Because it's actually making me laugh, and not at how melodramatic the characters are (since they don't seem to be), but with the writing itself. It's funny! FFIX did the same thing, but was much more refined. Why? It nailed the balance of a serious story, interspersed with many light-hearted moments. On the one hand, we have Vivi and everything that goes on with him, and the other we have Steiner smuggling Garnet across the boarder in a sack of pickles--it's a little thing called diversity.

Do JRPGs need to be gritty to be better? No. Are they about to die in obscurity? No. They just need to get back to refining what they already are known for: engaging stories, developed characters, and interesting combat systems.

I really love the "JRPGs are story driven!" line or "you just don't like JRPGs because you don't like good videogame stories!"

JRPG storylines are by far the worst aspect of such games...well, maybe not as bad as their cliche anime characters. Even though I would rather have ARPG combat ala Secret of Mana or Kingdoms of Amalur, the turn based combat in JRPGs isn't game breaking (unless it's just really slow paced and takes forever to get through a battle).

And I actually re-read the OP's comment, and he makes a good point. He's not saying JRPGs need to become brown/grey military shooters set in Afghanistan. He's simply saying their stories could be a little more serious and involve political intrigue, with characters that aren't either good or evil--similar to Game of Thrones, although it obviously doesn't NEED to be set in a medieval setting.

It would be refreshing to have some villains in JRPGs who actually had a real motivating factor that led them to do what they do instead of them wanting to take over the world, because well...they're evil. It would also be nice to have the hero question whether that villain really is a villain. Maybe you're trying to take out the villain because he killed the king, but you find out the king was planning a war of attrition or something, and the "villain" was really just preventing a catastrophe. Something like that.

Daystar Clarion:
In my humble opinion, JRPGs don't need to be grittier, they need to be less like a bad soap opera.

I couldn't stand FF13 for that reason. So goddamn cheesey with no selfawareness of said cheesiness.

Indeed.

OT: I'll sum up my opinion on the OP with this remark:

The day some all powerful overseer manages to impose a formula that must be adhered to in order to constitute 'good' story telling,[1] story telling as an art form, a form of expression and just about anything worth creating or observing would die.

[1] In this case, a decreed minimum level of grittiness.

FFP2:
Err... no.

Tons of people still love JRPGs.

And one of the main reasons I love JRPGs is because they are usually the opposite of dark and gritty.

True enough. One of the best aspects of certain JRPGs is how they turn rather dark and terrifying prospects (SMT games are usually about cosmic horror apocalypses, TWEWY is about purgatory, there's about a thousand potential 'fates worse than death' in the KH universe, Dark Cloud 2 is about people being erased from time, the act III plot twist of Xenoblade, Ni No Kuni starts with the protagonists' mother's death, etc. etc.)

While keeping the journey joyful, fun, and optimistic. Most JRPG plots are a celebration of human agency, which I think is a boon in an industry saturated with stories about 'gritty' 'dark' and 'realistic' subjects.

Those games have their place. I don't think JRPGs are that place, usually. (Dark Souls does gritty and dark like a champion, but that doesn't mean every JRPG has to be that way.)

They need to emphasize plots rather than character and set design.

Christopher Fisher:
I really love the "JRPGs are story driven!" line or "you just don't like JRPGs because you don't like good videogame stories!"

JRPG storylines are by far the worst aspect of such games...well, maybe not as bad as their cliche anime characters. Even though I would rather have ARPG combat ala Secret of Mana or Kingdoms of Amalur, the turn based combat in JRPGs isn't game breaking (unless it's just really slow paced and takes forever to get through a battle).

And I actually re-read the OP's comment, and he makes a good point. He's not saying JRPGs need to become brown/grey military shooters set in Afghanistan. He's simply saying their stories could be a little more serious and involve political intrigue, with characters that aren't either good or evil--similar to Game of Thrones, although it obviously doesn't NEED to be set in a medieval setting.

It would be refreshing to have some villains in JRPGs who actually had a real motivating factor that led them to do what they do instead of them wanting to take over the world, because well...they're evil. It would also be nice to have the hero question whether that villain really is a villain. Maybe you're trying to take out the villain because he killed the king, but you find out the king was planning a war of attrition or something, and the "villain" was really just preventing a catastrophe. Something like that.

*sigh*... really? Needless to say I wholeheartedly think that's full of it.

Okay, here's a by NO means comprehensive list;

and that doesn't even scratch the surface.

Lilani:

gyrobot:
Well lets think for a moment why people hates JRPGs? Because it doesn't fit the current standards expected by the current attitude towards the fantasy genre.

But what do people expect from the fantasy genre now? To emulate ASOIAF, the political intrigue, the brutal cynicism and ultimately be as mature as possible. The funny thing is that JRPGs at one point was like that with Ogre Battle, Valkyrie Profile and Xenogears which served as the greats of JRPG. When JRPGs made the shift to making stuff lighter in content, WRPGs picked the ball up, using ASOIAF rather than Tolkien as their inspiration and has sold well compared to JRPGs which is becoming mostly kiddier.

So for JRPGs to be liked again, I recommend tossing in a bit of ASOIAF, some mature content and call us in the morning. We will dismiss the Turn Based stuff as part the genetic makeup of the genre. But the childishness is a disease that needs to be cured

The problem is, the things you want to change are what fundamentally make them JRPGs. Song of Ice and Fire may be what some people in the realm of Western fantasy realm expect, but Japanese fantasy is a whole other ball game. If you don't like the elements it features, then perhaps JRPGs just aren't for you. I wouldn't go complaining about how an egg salad has too much egg, because without the egg it's just...salad. Well, coleslaw really.

I mean, not only are you generalizing JRPGs but also Western RPGs. I've never read or watched anything involving ASOIAF, and I still enjoy plenty of fantasy stories. There's room for more than one type of fantasy in this big old world of ours. Anytime somebody starts talking about how we need to homogenize a certain genre it makes me cringe, because it's always unnecessary. You enjoy the fantasy you like, I'll enjoy mine. That's the reason fantasy is so great--it can be catered to fit what anybody wants.

You and I don't agree often, but this is one of them.

To the OP: I don't see why you would want every RPG style to end up like ASOIAF, wouldn't that just become boring to a whole new level (as well as killing your beloved setting). Anytime you try to bring everything under the prevue of a single style you only manage to make it mundane. The reason ASOIAF did so well is because it was fresh and new, not because it is the penultimate version of Fantasy. Hell, I prefer my fantasy to be even more fantastic and strange, but you don't hear me wishing that upon every game/movie out there.

Second; Gritty doesn't mean like ASOIAF. Yes ASOIAF is gritty, but you say gritty in the title then use the body of your argument to say like ASOIAF. Hell, Tolkien is gritty to a certain extent, yet that isn't what defines it and makes it good. The other issue with gritty is like what Liliani said, when you try to force gritty you end up with the new DMC reboot. You get something that isn't technically bad, but comes off as very cheesy and forced.

I think you might just not like JRPGs. Many of us like our JRPGs because they aren't like WRPGs where they force atypical fantasy concepts on us. In JRPGs we can step into so many different worlds and have completely new experiences, and if we feel like traditional fantasy, we always have WRPGs.

Christopher Fisher:
I really love the "JRPGs are story driven!" line or "you just don't like JRPGs because you don't like good videogame stories!"

JRPG storylines are by far the worst aspect of such games...well, maybe not as bad as their cliche anime characters. Even though I would rather have ARPG combat ala Secret of Mana or Kingdoms of Amalur, the turn based combat in JRPGs isn't game breaking (unless it's just really slow paced and takes forever to get through a battle).

And I actually re-read the OP's comment, and he makes a good point. He's not saying JRPGs need to become brown/grey military shooters set in Afghanistan. He's simply saying their stories could be a little more serious and involve political intrigue, with characters that aren't either good or evil--similar to Game of Thrones, although it obviously doesn't NEED to be set in a medieval setting.

It would be refreshing to have some villains in JRPGs who actually had a real motivating factor that led them to do what they do instead of them wanting to take over the world, because well...they're evil. It would also be nice to have the hero question whether that villain really is a villain. Maybe you're trying to take out the villain because he killed the king, but you find out the king was planning a war of attrition or something, and the "villain" was really just preventing a catastrophe. Something like that.

Yeah, because Final Fantasy Tactics, Vagrant Story and Fire Emblem didn't already cover that sort of political story... OH WAIT!

Actually, if anyone can show me a WRPG story with more political intrigue, grey-and-grey morality and general adult themes than Vagrant Story, I won't just eat my hat, I'll cover it in Reggae Reggae sauce and serve it up for Sunday dinner.

I wasn't aware that everyone no longer likes JRPGs anymore. I could have sworn that plenty of people still love them for what they are, and that it would alienate a lot of people if they suddenly became more like WRPGs as a whole.

I think what you are really trying to say is, you don't like JRPGs(There's nothing wrong with that), and want them to accommodate your preferences, and don't seem to realize that there are a large amount of people who like, or even find the way most JRPGs are done to be preferable to what you seem to be asking for.

Yatsuno is pretty much what I was describing as being part of the era of JRPGs that had everything the western audience wants. Guy was the scriptwriter of Tactics and Vagrant.

All it needs nowadays is to have the same content maturity level of the newer WRPGs, aka stop at nothing for a CERO Z.

gyrobot:

I want morally complex characters, to make people question themselves in life. To show how sometimes we are not steadfast and well-adjusted and altruistic but can be petty, self destructive and self loathing. Western gaming is not afraid to give extremely fatal flaws to the heroes in general and make them pay dearly for it.

If a hero must angst, they will do it through rage and decadence rather than crying about it

Okay, this part I can agree with. But having "grit" doesn't always equal complex characters. In fact, having nothing but these dark and edgy themes really takes away from whole characters. If a character can't feel anything but anger and rage and resentment, then the character loses quite a bit of depth. With your example of Raynor, he isn't always in some drunken rage wanting to destroy something, he can also be light hearted, laugh a little, have some fun. He isn't about to cut himself on his edginess. Having light heartedness in a game helps show the gravity of the darker situations, which is why you spend the first hour or so of Kingdom Hearts(nearly any of the games if you come to think of it) faffing about with friends for a bit before shit hits the fan. The game is also a great example of a character arcs of those that find themselves morally conflicted as to what to do. Riku and Terra both seek power to protect their friends, but find themselves swallowed by it, Ansem, who was once wise and powerful, finds himself seeking only revenge, even at the cost of others, instead of repairing the damage that he himself caused. Some JRPGs lack it, but others hit it spot on, and those are the better ones. JRPGs just need balance, instead of all of one or the other, which they sometimes have troubles with.

I'm sure I'm about the 20th persona to mention this but it sounds like OP is saying the problem with JRPGs is that they're JRPGs, and that the solution is to turn them into toned down western rpgs. Since I don't care for JRPGs at all I can't say I disagree with you, but I imagine most fans of the genre would.

Innegativeion:

Those games have their place. I don't think JRPGs are that place, usually. (Dark Souls does gritty and dark like a champion, but that doesn't mean every JRPG has to be that way.)

I wouldn't really call DS a "JRPG" per se, it's more like an ARPG to me. I get your point though. It's probably the only "gritty" game that I can stand playing.

Exius Xavarus:

FFP2:

Exius Xavarus:

This guy understands. Although I do enjoy stories that have a subtle darkness to them. But this is typically the reason I love JRPGs.

Persona 4 would totally be the greatest game EVER if the enemies were terrorists, every second word was a swear and if it was all dipped in lovely, gritty grey and brown!:-P

Honestly, I think JRPGs are the only genre not to have a really brown and "gritty" game.

OP: Look at a pic of The Gapra Whitewood from FF13 and compare that to a "gritty" game... for example GTA4. I know which game I'd rather play.

While I'm not a large fan of FF13, I'd rather play that, than play GTA4. Largely because I dislike GTA as a whole. :x

Any other FF (or just San Andreas in the GTA slot, too wigger for me) and I'd have to agree. Okay... Any other FF except for Dirge of Cerberus.

Republican Space Rangers >>>>> GTAVC > GTAIV >>> FFXIII >> GTASA >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dirge of Cerberus

Plot and tone are one thing but what I'd really like to see in JRPGs is all to do with the combat system. I'd either want to see more JRPGs take on a combat system like that of Kingdom Hearts or for JRPGs to go back to the turn-based system of Dragon Quest and, Final Fantasy titles from 10 and back. Other than my gripes in the battle system (that's the core gameplay after all, isn't it?) I don't really have any gripes with JRPGs. I like the stories in the newer JRPGs I've played like Last Story and, Xenoblade Chronicles and I really don't think a layer of grit would have helped them out very much. Hell, Final Fantasy IX is my all time favorite JRPG and it's absolutely squeaky clean and, grit free. Ya know what? Make more JRPGs like Final Fantasy IX.

The problems people tend to have with the genre do not lie solely in narrative trope or presentation style; indeed, those are points usually cited as favorable. I'd argue that the game mechanics, which by and large rely on strict archetypes, rock-paper-scissors dynamics, and heavy amounts of grind in order to advance is the problem.

A lot of JRPG are mature. Pretty much any Final Fantasy or Breath of Fire are mature, the Phantasy Star serie too. What makes maturity is the story telling, deep characters, even "one dimentional" characters can be written in a mature
manner.

Game of Thrones, on the other hand, I watched the first season and I wouldn't call it mature. Maturity isn't defined by sex, gore, deaths, cussing and nude wiminz, that is the definition of "maturity" a ten year old would have. Because "maturity" means "the stuffs for adult" and that's porno, death and violence.
This is not mature, it is gritty.

If you want gritty JRPGs there are a few Demon Souls/Dark Souls are pretty gritty and really mature but can be hard to grasp because they don't give any exposition about the plot, there are pieces of information everywhere in the dialogue, the scenery, the character design, items and it's to the player to assemble the puzzle. (And that's coming from someone who hate Demon/Dark Souls' gameplay)
If you want a (less) gritty and (less but still) mature JRPG there is also Dragon's Dogma that is much less reticent to explain its plot.

As for WRPG, if you want a mature WRPG there is Dragon Age : Origin which happens to be gritty too. There are probably some others but I don't have an example of non gritty but mature WRPG for now.

Just to make my point clear, one last example that is not an RPG, but that most peoples will agree is not mature but gritty : the new DmC.
Because everyone adding "fuck you" every other line is instant maturity for any story.

gyrobot:
Yatsuno is pretty much what I was describing as being part of the era of JRPGs that had everything the western audience wants. Guy was the scriptwriter of Tactics and Vagrant.

All it needs nowadays is to have the same content maturity level of the newer WRPGs, aka stop at nothing for a CERO Z.

You still haven't answered this question, though: Why must all JRPGs and WRPGs be the same? Why must they have the same maturity level, and be based on the same trends in fantasy? To me that seems like the fastest way to make the genre dull in both the west and east. Nobody is saying mature elements shouldn't be explored, all we're saying is you keep saying all fantasy needs to be like this which is just ridiculous. There's enough fantasy to go around for everyone, and just because you don't like a certain kind doesn't mean it doesn't deserve to exist. There are plenty of people in this thread who have said they don't like ASOIAF, but none of them have said it or fantasy like it should no longer continue to be made.

Honestly, we don't really need more grit in games right now. Yes, I'd like to see maturity, and yes I'd like to see some darker games. These are not the same things as grit though.

Lilani:

Paradoxrifts:
At this late stage the people who're still holding a candle for the Japanese video game industry remind me strongly of children who're convinced that they can get their divorced parents back together again. Western games were never popular in Japan. The tastes of mainstream gamers in the West have moved from the period that they overlapped with what was being released by the Japanese industry.

Just accept that it's over already, then move on.

So, which Japanese gamemakers are posting losses like EA, or going bankrupt like THQ? Because I can't think of any, and it's really making me scratch my head every time people talk about gloom and doom for JRPGs. Everyone keeps saying they're on the decline, but I can't see it. All I see is more people than ever before telling me I need to play games like Persona and Professor Layton and Catherine.

EDIT: It seems in the early morning haze of my mind I may have misread this. Now I see you're saying that "it's over" in regards to western and Japanese games having a lot in common. Never mind then, my bad~

Of your three examples, only one was a console title. JRPG's are alive and well on handhelds but have been pretty dead on consoles this gen. Are you really going to act like the consoles are seeing SNES/PS1/PS2 levels of JRPG's?

Anyway, to the OP. I have no idea what your 6 letter acronym stands for but I can say that JRPG's don't need more grit. Less anime would be nice but we don't need brown and fuckin gray.

Crono1973:

Lilani:

Paradoxrifts:
At this late stage the people who're still holding a candle for the Japanese video game industry remind me strongly of children who're convinced that they can get their divorced parents back together again. Western games were never popular in Japan. The tastes of mainstream gamers in the West have moved from the period that they overlapped with what was being released by the Japanese industry.

Just accept that it's over already, then move on.

So, which Japanese gamemakers are posting losses like EA, or going bankrupt like THQ? Because I can't think of any, and it's really making me scratch my head every time people talk about gloom and doom for JRPGs. Everyone keeps saying they're on the decline, but I can't see it. All I see is more people than ever before telling me I need to play games like Persona and Professor Layton and Catherine.

EDIT: It seems in the early morning haze of my mind I may have misread this. Now I see you're saying that "it's over" in regards to western and Japanese games having a lot in common. Never mind then, my bad~

Of your three examples, only one was a console title. JRPG's are alive and well on handhelds but have been pretty dead on consoles this gen. Are you really going to act like the consoles are seeing SNES/PS1/PS2 levels of JRPG's?

Anyway, to the OP. I have no idea what your 6 letter acronym stands for but I can say that JRPG's don't need more grit. Less anime would be nice but we don't need brown and fuckin gray.

Honestly I haven't had a modern console in a while, but looking at the top 10 games from Japan last year it seems yes, the top three are all handheld games. Which looking at that reminds me that first of all the 360 hasn't taken off much at all in Japan, so really and truly the only consoles they really have in spades over there are the Nintendo DS/3DS, Wii, and the PS3.

And given their top games are on the 3DS, it stands to reason that even though they're on handhelds enough people there own them that they can easily beat console sales. Which means it also stands to reason that their games would be made more interchangeably between console and handheld, since they are both on equal footing there.

So first of all what's going on here is a difference in marketing. Yes more successful Japanese games are on handhelds, but that neither means they are doomed to be unsuccessful nor are they of a lesser quality than console games (unless you're one of those kinds of people). Because, as has always been the case, JRPGs are made to first and foremost appeal to a Japanese audience. And if the Japanese gamers are highly receptive to handhelds, then that's good for them. All of the games on that top 10 list are from Japanese gamemakers, namely Nintendo, Square Enix, Bandai, and Capcom. So it seems along with western consoles, the Japanese audience isn't receptive to western games, either.

My point in saying all of this is that JRPGs are by no means dead, nor even dying. More are being made on handhelds, but that's more caused by a shift in the interests of Japanese gamers than a failure of the industry. Square, Capcom and the rest all remain very successful and profitable companies, regardless of what consoles their games are coming out on. The only "mistake" they've made (if you can call it that) is catering to their most immediate and receptive audience, which at this point in time is no longer moving parallel to the western games market in terms of trends and interests. Handheld consoles aren't as big here, so from our point of view JRPGs are failing as well, but really it's just a difference in trends.

So, in conclusion: A trend in JRPGs that doesn't quite jive with a western audience ≠ JRPGs "failing" as a whole, or on their way out.

And I actually had to Google it to learn ASOIAF stands for A Song of Ice and Fire, better known as the Game of Thrones series (though if I recall correctly, ASOIAF is usually used to specifically refer to the book series).

Lilani:

Crono1973:

Lilani:

So, which Japanese gamemakers are posting losses like EA, or going bankrupt like THQ? Because I can't think of any, and it's really making me scratch my head every time people talk about gloom and doom for JRPGs. Everyone keeps saying they're on the decline, but I can't see it. All I see is more people than ever before telling me I need to play games like Persona and Professor Layton and Catherine.

EDIT: It seems in the early morning haze of my mind I may have misread this. Now I see you're saying that "it's over" in regards to western and Japanese games having a lot in common. Never mind then, my bad~

Of your three examples, only one was a console title. JRPG's are alive and well on handhelds but have been pretty dead on consoles this gen. Are you really going to act like the consoles are seeing SNES/PS1/PS2 levels of JRPG's?

Anyway, to the OP. I have no idea what your 6 letter acronym stands for but I can say that JRPG's don't need more grit. Less anime would be nice but we don't need brown and fuckin gray.

Honestly I haven't had a modern console in a while, but looking at the top 10 games from Japan last year it seems yes, the top three are all handheld games. Which looking at that reminds me that first of all the 360 hasn't taken off much at all in Japan, so really and truly the only consoles they really have in spades over there are the Nintendo DS/3DS, Wii, and the PS3.

And given their top games are on the 3DS, it stands to reason that even though they're on handhelds enough people there own them that they can easily beat console sales. Which means it also stands to reason that their games would be made more interchangeably between console and handheld, since they are both on equal footing there.

So first of all what's going on here is a difference in marketing. Yes more successful Japanese games are on handhelds, but that neither means they are doomed to be unsuccessful nor are they of a lesser quality than console games (unless you're one of those kinds of people). Because, as has always been the case, JRPGs are made to first and foremost appeal to a Japanese audience. And if the Japanese gamers are highly receptive to handhelds, then that's good for them. All of the games on that top 10 list are from Japanese gamemakers, namely Nintendo, Square Enix, Bandai, and Capcom. So it seems along with western consoles, the Japanese audience isn't receptive to western games, either.

My point in saying all of this is that JRPGs are by no means dead, nor even dying. More are being made on handhelds, but that's more caused by a shift in the interests of Japanese gamers than a failure of the industry. Square, Capcom and the rest all remain very successful and profitable companies, regardless of what consoles their games are coming out on. The only "mistake" they've made (if you can call it that) is catering to their most immediate and receptive audience, which at this point in time is no longer moving parallel to the western games market in terms of trends and interests. Handheld consoles aren't as big here, so from our point of view JRPGs are failing as well, but really it's just a difference in trends.

So, in conclusion: A trend in JRPGs that doesn't quite jive with a western audience ≠ JRPGs "failing" as a whole, or on their way out.

And I actually had to Google it to learn ASOIAF stands for A Song of Ice and Fire, better known as the Game of Thrones series (though if I recall correctly, ASOIAF is usually used to specifically refer to the book series).

People want console JRPG's, well I do anyway. I have played my fair share of JRPG's on the PSP and DS and they just aren't the same. Thanks for the acronym explanation, I wish people would stop abusing acronyms likes this.

Crono1973:
People want console JRPG's, well I do anyway. I have played my fair share of JRPG's on the PSP and DS and they just aren't the same. Thanks for the acronym explanation, I wish people would stop abusing acronyms likes this.

Yeah, if I had a console I think I'd like to play some newer JRPGs as well, but unfortunately we're sort of at the mercy of the trends in Japan, lol. And yeah, a lot of people here have the problem of assuming that EVERYBODY uses acronyms when talking about stuff, so that must mean EVERYBODY knows what EVERY long acronym stands for. Most recognize the name "Game of Thrones" more than they recognize "A Song of Fire and Ice," so I feel like the OP's use and lack of explanation of that long acronym speaks even more to their myopic view of fantasy.

Crono1973:

Lilani:

Crono1973:

Of your three examples, only one was a console title. JRPG's are alive and well on handhelds but have been pretty dead on consoles this gen. Are you really going to act like the consoles are seeing SNES/PS1/PS2 levels of JRPG's?

Anyway, to the OP. I have no idea what your 6 letter acronym stands for but I can say that JRPG's don't need more grit. Less anime would be nice but we don't need brown and fuckin gray.

Honestly I haven't had a modern console in a while, but looking at the top 10 games from Japan last year it seems yes, the top three are all handheld games. Which looking at that reminds me that first of all the 360 hasn't taken off much at all in Japan, so really and truly the only consoles they really have in spades over there are the Nintendo DS/3DS, Wii, and the PS3.

And given their top games are on the 3DS, it stands to reason that even though they're on handhelds enough people there own them that they can easily beat console sales. Which means it also stands to reason that their games would be made more interchangeably between console and handheld, since they are both on equal footing there.

So first of all what's going on here is a difference in marketing. Yes more successful Japanese games are on handhelds, but that neither means they are doomed to be unsuccessful nor are they of a lesser quality than console games (unless you're one of those kinds of people). Because, as has always been the case, JRPGs are made to first and foremost appeal to a Japanese audience. And if the Japanese gamers are highly receptive to handhelds, then that's good for them. All of the games on that top 10 list are from Japanese gamemakers, namely Nintendo, Square Enix, Bandai, and Capcom. So it seems along with western consoles, the Japanese audience isn't receptive to western games, either.

My point in saying all of this is that JRPGs are by no means dead, nor even dying. More are being made on handhelds, but that's more caused by a shift in the interests of Japanese gamers than a failure of the industry. Square, Capcom and the rest all remain very successful and profitable companies, regardless of what consoles their games are coming out on. The only "mistake" they've made (if you can call it that) is catering to their most immediate and receptive audience, which at this point in time is no longer moving parallel to the western games market in terms of trends and interests. Handheld consoles aren't as big here, so from our point of view JRPGs are failing as well, but really it's just a difference in trends.

So, in conclusion: A trend in JRPGs that doesn't quite jive with a western audience ≠ JRPGs "failing" as a whole, or on their way out.

And I actually had to Google it to learn ASOIAF stands for A Song of Ice and Fire, better known as the Game of Thrones series (though if I recall correctly, ASOIAF is usually used to specifically refer to the book series).

People want console JRPG's, well I do anyway. I have played my fair share of JRPG's on the PSP and DS and they just aren't the same. Thanks for the acronym explanation, I wish people would stop abusing acronyms likes this.

Yes, but Lilani is saying that Japanese audiences don't want that, and who are Japanese gamemakers going to cater to first and foremost?

Japanese gamers are moving very much into handheld, and consoles are regarded as a family thing - the Wii and WiiU are exactly what the Japanese want out of a console right now. So how does that translate to us? Well, most of the time it doesn't. Unfortunate as that is for a lot of Western gamers who grew up with JRPGs and hoped that JRPGs would grow up with us, it might take a while for that to happen.

A bit off topic but, Innegativeion? is your avatar of Naoto Shirogane in casual girl clothes?

OT: I have little to no expertise in the fields of Global Marketing of games, or knowledge of Game of Thrones TV series (or the book series). That said RPG's are my favorite genre of games. Slap a J or W if you want, I don't care, I only care if I have fun. Why do JRPG's need to change? To be more popular in the West? Why would a Japanese developer risk alienating their core demographic by trying to cater to an audience which might not buy it anyway? Sure I would have liked some things in some games to change, but then I would be nitpicking. Why does there need to be more political intrigue? Not everyone finds such plots enthralling, not everyone wants to be embroiled in such machinations. The closest I want to getting involved in politics in my game Disgaea. I don't doubt that this is appealing to some, but if there is such a Japanese audience I'm sure such a game will be made or announced.

If JRPG's HAVE to change, the changes won't be forced by any single forum, thread, post or online debate, such a change will only come if a Developer decides to give it a try. If you want to be that Dev, go for it. If it is a smashing success? More power to you, go sleep on that bed on money you made.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked