Well looking in the web for reviews for Disgaea 3, I noticed that once again the scores were pathetic and not equivalant to what the review itself said. I wonder why big sites constantly give JRPG games that are not from a famous series (I.E. Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest) such low scores.
NOTE: please don't start a debate about RPG quality, there are plenty of good games if you look behind the obvious choices.

inu-kun:
Well looking in the web for reviews for Disgaea 3, I noticed that once again the scores were pathetic and not equivalant to what the review itself said. I wonder why big sites constantly give JRPG games that are not from a famous series (I.E. Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest) such low scores.

FF seems to have dominated the JRPG market (why, I'll never understand) an' I think with big sites, like GameSpot, it's just a huge bias. It sucks, to be blunt.

Reviewers give high marks for realistic graphics,innovation,online MP and VO. JRPGS don't do these well.

JRPGs are very much a matter of taste. Especially tactical JRPGs like Disgaea, which take a lot of the less-popular elements of JRPGs and turn them up to 11.

You have to really like a very specific blend of gameplay elements to love JRPGs. A lot of reviewers don't like these elements, and thus do not think highly of the genre.

Ultimately it comes down to "numerical assessments of game quality are a load of bollocks". If you want to know how good a game is, find someone who likes the genre in question, and whose opinion you trust, and listen to them talk about it.

inu-kun:
I wonder why big sites constantly give JRPG games that are not from a famous series (I.E. Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest) such low scores..

Hmm, to my opinion, Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest ARE famous series, and they earn pretty good scores :P

http://metacritics.com/search/process?sb=0&tfs=all&ts=final+fantasy&ty=3&x=7&y=11

Almost all of them are "green scores", indicating they're good, or at least worth playing.

The only reasons I can think of for those low scores are lack of hype (Reviewers can be mean as they want to games), time constraints (nowdays, every review need to be amongst the first, I really doubt the reviewer had time to think of the plot and like the characters) and of course lack of bribe money from the developers :-P

It's sad, but niche genres hardly ever get a break. It's not like MGS, Halo, Splinter Cell, and COD, that constantly are given breaks and even perfect scores.

I blame the faulty review systems that tend to work on how much the reviewer thinks the general public will recieve it as opposed to how much fun it will be to those who like the genre. (Game Informer I'm looking at you)

Proto Cloud:
It's sad, but niche genres hardly ever get a break. It's not like MGS, Halo, Splinter Cell, and COD, that constantly are given breaks and even perfect scores.

JRPG is niche? See Spierek's post.

I liked all the JRPGs I ever played, in particular FF8 and Legend of Dragoon, both of which got great scores.

I can not say that there is no bias in reviewing (Look at Yahtzee), as that is just outright lying. However, sometimes we need a bias to tell us what we like or don't like. (Again, look at Yahtzee)

Random encounters, and repetitive combat (not in the good way).

JRPGs are mostly terrible, which is why they get mostly terrible reviews.

Najos:
JRPGs are mostly terrible, which is why they get mostly terrible reviews.

Oh, the razor wit! You took an adjective and used it to describe two different things, thus proving they are of similar quality! Well played Sir, well played. I called Squeenix and they agreed that your insult stung so badly that they will now produce only FPS games premade for the American market. You are a winner!

Reaperman Wompa:
Random encounters, and repetitive combat (not in the good way).

I already wrote that you should not start any arguing about the quality, also, don't categorize every JRPG in existence. Final Fantasy is NOT the best series but rather the most hyped, there are enough good jprg games out there but because of the same reason I posted this debate they are unknown.

Hmm, to my opinion, Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest ARE famous series, and they earn pretty good scores :P

Try reading next time. The question is why games that are not from one of those two series do not recieve the same treatment at review.

It does appear that most game reviewers dock a point or two from the review if your JRPG doesn't have the words "Final Fantasy" or "Dragon Quest" anywhere in the title. Take Lost Odyssey, for instance. Reviews generally in the 7-8 range, but the game itself is significantly better than the majority of Final Fantasy games, almost all of which have higher review averages.

Disgaea 3 is getting the same treatment. Comprehensively lower scores than Final Fantasy Tactics, but it's being hailed as the best of the Disgaea games, a series which destroys other TRPGs for playability, story, attitude, and, most importantly, actual tactical involvement.

GloatingSwine:

Hmm, to my opinion, Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest ARE famous series, and they earn pretty good scores :P

Try reading next time. The question is why games that are not from one of those two series do not recieve the same treatment at review.

The Escapist:Forums:Gaming Discussion:Why JRPG reviews get bad scores?

Last time I checked Final Fantasy is a JRPG.

Oh, the razor wit! You took an adjective and used it to describe two different things, thus proving they are of similar quality! Well played Sir, well played. I called Squeenix and they agreed that your insult stung so badly that they will now produce only FPS games premade for the American market. You are a winner!

Take note of my weary sigh.

The Escapist:Forums:Gaming Discussion:Why JRPG reviews get bad scores?

Last time I checked Final Fantasy is a JRPG.

I wonder why big sites constantly give JRPG games that are not from a famous series (I.E. Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest) such low scores.

Reading, see?

GloatingSwine:

Reading, see?

Yes I read the title.

Yes. And obviously not the actual OP, as is generally reccommended when you are going to reply to a thread, yes?

GloatingSwine:
Yes. And obviously not the actual OP, as is generally reccommended when you are going to reply to a thread, yes?

Well sorry for thinking the title should fit the subject matter (Hmm "Cooking with the Stars" must be about TV repair.)

The title does fit the subject matter, but that doesn't mean that it is the whole of the subject, especially given the length constraints imposed on a forum title. Really, if you don't read the thread, how can you contribute anything of value to it?

What the hell is the point of this thread...

OP is asking why JRPG's mostly get bad scores, but he also picks the conditions under which the discussion should happen, by filtering out 'quality' as a possible explanation for low scores.

Yeah... it's not much of a discussion then, if there can't be any proper criticism.
Perhaps you just want to blame reviewers for being bad at their job (according to you, at least), simply because you don't agree with the scores.

BUT. Guess what: JRPG's, or basically ANY game can be considered bad/mediocre, and will thus be appointed a lower score. There will always be people who like the game (personally I just LOVE Big Rigs because it's so damn awesome in its crappiness), but a reviewer tries to be objective. "Objective", from a Western point of view. Go live in Japan if you want to see JRPG's rated as you want them.

Uhh...the reviewers didn't like the game, I guess.

Why? They'd have mentioned that in the review.

GloatingSwine:
The title does fit the subject matter, but that doesn't mean that it is the whole of the subject, especially given the length constraints imposed on a forum title. Really, if you don't read the thread, how can you contribute anything of value to it?

Why do JRPGS that are not FF get bad scores? and the length imposed isn't that short.

I have read the thread and am nit-picking about the title.

GloatingSwine:

It does appear that most game reviewers dock a point or two from the review if your JRPG doesn't have the words "Final Fantasy" or "Dragon Quest" anywhere in the title. Take Lost Odyssey, for instance. Reviews generally in the 7-8 range, but the game itself is significantly better than the majority of Final Fantasy games, almost all of which have higher review averages.

Well, not really. The problem with Lost Odyssey is that it's fighting system is altogether more traditional than most other Jrpgs now. It was executed very well, but it could very easily have been any game from the Snes or even Nes era of Rpgs dressed up in prettier graphics. The storyline wasn't particularly inspired and had several moments that had me snorting in derision at the screen, particularly after the two children were introduced. The battle system was good, but the simplicity of the four-element system had me craving some more complexity.

In short, reviewers were right to give it 8/10, since that's an appropriate score for the game. I think that one of the other reasons that reviewers don't tend to give Jrpgs big scores is that there's not very much innovation found within the Jrpg genre. Innovations are usually very few and far between, and the lack of innovation tends to put off reviewers.

OP is asking why JRPG's mostly get bad scores, but he also picks the conditions under which the discussion should happen, by filtering out 'quality' as a possible explanation for low scores.

No, the OP is asking why JRPGs which are not part of the two main franchises get lower scores, even when reviews do not justify them as lower or the main franchises as better, without making blanket statements that these games are simply "not as good", as they are plainly not.

A 78 average is pathetic? (Heck I wouldn't be surprised if some points were knocked of for SNES graphics on The PS3)

http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ps3/disgaea3absenceofjustice

Ironically, western style games aren't that well recieved in the east at all (I think gears of war was the only FPS that was actually really wel recieved by their reviewers, which is perplexing)

Probably just cultural: we enjoy chainsawing our way through legions of our fellow man while they enjoy exaggerating the hell out of legions of their fellow cat-people

personally i think you either love JRPG's or you depsise them a tad like marmite ( yeah im british so it isnt bovril ) but at the end of the day its a matter of opinion for example i personally think FF2 is a great game even thoughthe random encounters piss me off beyond belief but my cousin thinks its the worst game he has ever played. i think i know why they get so bad scores i think its beacause its WESTERN reviewers reviewing JAPANESE games as western 'mainstream gamers' are not intrested in what JRPG's have to offer. so if you go to japan their JRPG's will rank higer in the rating list than our games

Well, not really. The problem with Lost Odyssey is that it's fighting system is altogether more traditional than most other Jrpgs now. It was executed very well, but it could very easily have been any game from the Snes or even Nes era of Rpgs dressed up in prettier graphics. The storyline wasn't particularly inspired and had several moments that had me snorting in derision at the screen, particularly after the two children were introduced. The battle system was good, but the simplicity of the four-element system had me craving some more complexity.

The only JRPG that doesn't have a battle system that would be possible on the SNES is Final Fantasy XII (and that's the one everyone hates). So no, that's not a valid criticism specifically of Lost Odyssey, and if you are going to use it, it should be applied equally to Final Fantasy (especially FFX) and especially Dragon Quest (A highly traditional series). These criticisms are, however, reserved for titles that don't have a big name on them.

Also, Lost Odyssey's battle system does have significant complexity beyond elemental alignment, the Guard Condition system is pretty much the core of it, a point emphasised by the fact that everyone gets brick walled at the first boss, which you can't effectively level grind past.

social_outcast:
Ironically, western style games aren't that well recieved in the east at all (I think gears of war was the only FPS that was actually really wel recieved by their reviewers, which is perplexing)

Nit pick to the rescue! Gears of War is Third person not First person (not a FPS). And Halo got a 37/40 from famitsu http://www.digitalbattle.com/2007/09/19/famitsu-reviews-halo-3-gives-it-3740/

shatnershaman:
A 78 average is pathetic? (Heck I wouldn't be surprised if some points were knocked of for SNES graphics on The PS3)

http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ps3/disgaea3absenceofjustice

(I'm assuming this is not a rhetorical question) Yes, 78 is pathetic, it is better than disgaea 1 and 2 which are amongst the best games in the genre, the game should hace gotten at least 95 (but it didn't because it is not an FPS).
Also, Tales of Vesperia got a crappy score, though it doesn't seem to be too bad.
BTW, I've seen a trailer to disgaea 3 and the graphics look signifacantly better than disgaea 2.

Reviews should be correct to the specific genre it belongs, if chrono trigger was released only now, I doubt it would get more than a score of 70 by the "current reviewers".

inu-kun:

shatnershaman:
A 78 average is pathetic? (Heck I wouldn't be surprised if some points were knocked of for SNES graphics on The PS3)

http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ps3/disgaea3absenceofjustice

(I'm assuming this is not a rhetorical question) Yes, 78 is pathetic, it is better than disgaea 1 and 2 which are amongst the best games in the genre, the game should hace gotten at least 95 (but it didn't because it is not an FPS).
Also, Tales of Vesperia got a crappy score, though it doesn't seem to be too bad.
BTW, I've seen a trailer to disgaea 3 and the graphics look signifacantly better than disgaea 2.

This is SNES graphics which is sad.

Other reasons why it didn't get a 95

gamespot:

The Bad

* Somehow turns your PS3 into a PS2
* Still features an absolutely atrocious camera
* Less accessible than ever for someone new to the series
* Not enough Prinnies, dood.

FPS does not mean good scores.

http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbox360/historychannelbattleforthepacific

Right, because if Chrono Trigger were released right now it would be a decade behind in graphics and gameplay. Why shouldn't it get a lower score because of this? A game like Disgaea 3, with outdated graphics, can't possibly be deserving of a 90+ review. Sure, it might be great at everything else, but graphics alone count for something. It'd be like writing an awesome essay, but using the wrong format or something.

Like I said earlier, most JRPGs get bad reviews simply because most of them are bad games. Games don't get review scores based on their genre. I mean, no one complains when another racing game comes out and gets a lower score.