orthodoxy1095
Banned
Someone mentioned this in the "why doesn't Sony have AAA JRPGs" thread and I actually agree with it. In fact I might have said something about this in this thread before, but I'm pretty sure I haven't.I can't even take a guess as to what you are referring to. Care to elaborate?
It's actually something I've thought about recently. When I think of an RPG, I think of something that comes from the heritage of tabletop games. There was a pretty ballsy quote by a Bioware writer a few years ago that I agree with:
"Well, before I address the main point I just want to take a slightly more controversial route: You can put a ‘J' in front of it, but it's not an RPG," argues The Old Republic lead writer Daniel Erickson. "You don't make any choices, you don't create a character, you don't live your character... I don't know what those are --adventure games maybe? But they're not RPG's.
I think Chris Avellone also provided a reasonable limiter to what the term "RPG" means:
CA: It's a continuing debate. In my opinion, an RPG is an RPG due to character development, character customization, significant character choice and effect on the world, ability for growth (both stats and psychologically), and the ability to genuinely play a role, preferably the wider, the better. There's probably a lot more aspects, but those are the ones that jump to mind.
I don't think you necessarily need to have every single piece from that statement (e.g. The Witcher 3), but if your game lacks any character creation, any dialogue options, any way to impact the ending of a game, really any major choice and consequence...you probably haven't created an RPG. And thinking about that, I think many "JRPGs" actually lack those elements. They're more of story-based adventure games or something else.