Support NeoGAF

[DNAbro]

It's not an opinion about what a JRPG is. And I'm not arguing with whether it's a negative or positive connotation. I'm questioning your definition of a JRPG. And no, just because an RPG is made in Japan, does not make it a JRPG. Dark Souls for example, is definitely not a JRPG, while it may be made in Japan, it has none of the stylistic features of a JRPG. I'm not at all ignorant. It's YOU who's ignorant. Refusing to accept that maybe, just maybe, your definition is incorrect. I'm not going to try to change your opinion though because there's no real point in it. I'm not the only one who subscribes to this definition. I'm going to leave it here, and we'll just have to agree to disagree.

it's a JRPG that has a lot in common with WRPGs

 

[Jazz573]

Dark Souls is made by Japanese devs, therefore it is a JRPG.

That's not what it means. It refers to a style of RPG traditionally made in Japan. There are RPGs made in Japan that definitely are not JRPGs. I know many people feel the way you do, but it's incorrect to classify games like Dark Souls as JRPGs.

 

[Fou-Lu]

It's not an opinion about what a JRPG is. And I'm not arguing with whether it's a negative or positive connotation. I'm questioning your definition of a JRPG. And no, just because an RPG is made in Japan, does not make it a JRPG. Dark Souls for example, is definitely not a JRPG, while it may be made in Japan, it has none of the stylistic features of a JRPG. I'm not at all ignorant. It's YOU who's ignorant. Refusing to accept that maybe, just maybe, your definition is incorrect. I'm not going to try to change your opinion though because there's no real point in it. I'm not the only one who subscribes to this definition. I'm going to leave it here, and we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Why are you trying to present your opinion as fact? That's not how this works man. There are multiple definitions of JRPG and no widespread agreement on which is factual.

 

[Northeastmonk]

Dark Souls is made by Japanese devs, therefore it is a JRPG.

Generally speaking of course.

You can define a JRPG by the fundamentals of not being able to go into a battle screen or possibly some sorta limit.

Just because your hero gains points and has a stamina bar doesn't mean it's a JRPG. It could be classified as an action game with RPG elements.

I'd say FFXV is more of an action game with RPG elements because you are not limited by much and there isn't a battle screen or some sorta hold.
There is a results screen, but IMO it holds on by just a thread.

The tales series is more of a JRPG than Dark Souls is.

I guess I wouldn't call Dark Souls an outright JRPG.

 

[Daingurse]

That's not what it means. It refers to a style of RPG traditionally made in Japan. There are RPGs made in Japan that definitely are not JRPGs. I know many people feel the way you do, but it's incorrect to classify games like Dark Souls as JRPGs.

According to who? There's no official definition for these terms.

 

[Jazz573]

Why are you trying to present your opinion as fact? That's not how this works man. There are multiple definitions of JRPG and no widespread agreement on which is factual.

I know there are other definitions, but that doesn't make them good definitions.

 

[Fou-Lu]

I know there are other definitions, but that doesn't make them good definitions.

What makes your definition better than any other?

 

[Xilium]

It's not an opinion about what a JRPG is. And I'm not arguing with whether it's a negative or positive connotation. I'm questioning your definition of a JRPG. And no, just because an RPG is made in Japan, does not make it a JRPG. Dark Souls for example, is definitely not a JRPG, while it may be made in Japan, it has none of the stylistic features of a JRPG. I'm not at all ignorant. It's YOU who's ignorant. Refusing to accept that maybe, just maybe, your definition is incorrect. I'm not going to try to change your opinion though because there's no real point in it. I'm not the only one who subscribes to this definition. I'm going to leave it here, and we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Honestly, the only people I see arguing for JRPG =/= Japanese developed RPG are all here on GAF and Dark/Demon's Souls tends to always be the focal point. For whatever reason, some people are just hellbent on disassociating that game with the JRPG label.

Personally, I think the game is very Japanese from a mechanical and philosophical design perspective. It being a "sword and board" action RPG is the only remotely western thing about the game imo.

 

[Gucci Messiah]

That's not what it means. It refers to a style of RPG traditionally made in Japan. There are RPGs made in Japan that definitely are not JRPGs. I know many people feel the way you do, but it's incorrect to classify games like Dark Souls as JRPGs.

You are wrong and keep trying to present your opinion as fact. The term is open to interpretation because the genre has evolved but at its most basic level JRPG refers to any role playing game to come out of Japan.

 

[Jazz573]

What makes your definition better than any other?

Because the other definitions unfairly pigeon-hole any RPGs made in Japan into the category of JRPG even if they don't fit the typical style of JRPGs.

 

[REDSLATE]

I know there are other definitions, but that doesn't make them good definitions.

You know what makes for a "good definition?"
A literal interpretation.

 

[Gucci Messiah]

Apparently only games with stereotypical anime characters, cliche storylines, and turn based combat can be considered JRPGs.

 

[Fou-Lu]

Because the other definitions unfairly pigeon-hole any RPGs made in Japan into the category of JRPG even if they don't fit the typical style of JRPGs.

But that's the issue, JRPGs have morphed and had so many incarnations that saying there is a typical style seems silly.

 

[ULTROS!]

I wasn't a big fan when a good number of JRPGs started going for the moe/chibi look.

 

[Jazz573]

Apparently only games with stereotypical anime characters, cliche storylines, and turn based combat can be considered JRPGs.

That's what I'm trying to say. Using the definition for JRPG as Role-Playing Game made in Japan, is unfair to RPGs in Japan that don't fit this criteria. Sorry, if I freaked out a little. I've settled down a little, and I realize I shouldn't have presented it as if it were fact.

 

[Northeastmonk]

But that's the issue, JRPGs have morphed and had so many incarnations that saying there is a typical style seems silly.

Where do you place tactics? It's sure a different game outside of a traditional JRPG. I believe it has changed too, but genres are still genres.

You can call it what you like, but there is a way or a nomenclature of genre to put games in at the end of the day. If you have to string it together you must do so. I think you need to be specific for the record, but cut it short for your own benefit?

 

[VanillaCakeIsBurning]

It's safe to say Japan has revolutionized just about every single genre. In my eyes if it wasn't for a Japanese influence we may have never gotten to where we are now. I think it was Japan's influence that brought back consoles and saved us from the video game crash. You can take that to the bank. I feel the hatred for Japanese games is ignorant. I felt that Phil Fish used an incredible amount of influence from Japanese designed games and his comment did not impress me nor do I think it should have ever impressed anyone.

I would not have been into video games at all had it not been for Japanese made video games. I will to this day say they have had the most influence on my life and my views of fantasy. I think the western market should respect them a lot more than they do.

I did not get into fantasy because of D&D. I respect D&D, but I was amazed by how many fun games I played throughout my younger years were Japanese. Of course there was Mortal Kombat and Killer Instinct, but at the heart of every single playformer, fighting game, beat 'em up, and especially role playing games were Japanese developers. I feel that the west has only really shined through during the Xbox 360 and PS3 gen. The PS2 had a huge library of Japanese made video games.

I think western companies had a formula. I'm not trying to discredit them. I feel as though the developers in Japan were hit pretty hard and the core model changed. I would like to see Japanese made games come back as strong. In fact, it's not been the case. We have a lot of Japanese made games already and SFV is the next huge fighting game to come out. MKX dominates as being an American video game company. I enjoyed Midway's games too. I still think Midway made fantastic arcade games. I just saw the rise of Namco and Capcom. Those influences stayed with me.

Japanese made RPG's aren't always a once in your life and that's it kinda thing. It use to be very diverse and it still is. You just can't keep a player wanting to gain experience, read a bunch of text, and keep them on the same path. IMO games have been becoming more and more action geared with less thought involved. No one wants to look at a JRPG without thinking it's some sorta scroll they have to read. I also think the gaming industry lost its vision with Triple A games and action games based on movies and cheap action thrills. We had MW take over and things went from having Halo on MS's Xbox to now every other game has the two pack model. I miss Japan's influence. I think there needs to be more and more Japanese developers from the past and present making content. The best idea out there could be from someone who couldn't get back into the scene or their employer is telling them they can't.

I think I enjoy more Japanese developed games than western made games. I look at my collection of video games and they are all developed in Japan. I could care less about where I'm at or how old I am. I feel good about saying it too. I've had to think about which western developers I enjoy because I really dislike a lot of them. They are an American McGee or a bunch of modernist sitting inside their studio with an idea. I miss Japan's influence in gaming and I will probably feel that way for the rest of my life.

The only real western things I kept were from the known western games that impacted gaming (God of War, Gears, BioShock, etc). That's about it.

A lot of this resonates with me. I think it's safe for me to say that without Japanese influence I probably would have very little interest in games as a whole. I do enjoy some Western games but what's always captivated my interest and passion and what's kept me thinking about what's coming in the future are Japanese games. They have a unique cultural flair, experience and history that is readily apparent in their games. The kinds of stories, characters, worlds and gameplay systems I've experienced in Japanese games are the reason why I have any interest in art now that I think about it more.

 

[Jazz573]

Where do you place tactics? It's sure a different game outside of a traditional JRPG. I believe it has changed too, but genres are still genres.

Well I consider Fire Emblem, Final Fantasy, Kingdom Hearts, and Etrian Odyssey to all be JRPGs. Fire Emblem is a cross between a JRPG and a SRPG / TRPG. Final Fantasy, well I shouldn't have to explain. Kingdom Hearts is a JRPG since it has all of the same kinds of tropes. Just as other ARPGs like Secret of Mana, Seiken Densetsu 3, the Ys series, etc. are also JRPGs. Etrian Odyssey is also a JRPG, because it is inspired by Wizardry which is widely credited as the precursor to JRPGs.

 

[Oddish1]

To me western RPGs and JRPGs are separate genres and we'd be better off if we stopped referring to them as their place of origin and instead called them something else. As it is, defining a games genre from its place of origin seems almost completely useless as a description.

 

[Adnor]

If some people consider Dark Souls an CRPG shouldn't they also consider Dragon Quest and Final Fantasy CRPGs because they're based on games like Wizardry and Ultima?

To me western RPGs and JRPGs are separate genres and we'd be better off if we stopped referring to them as their place of origin and instead called them something else. As it is, defining a games genre from its place of origin seems almost completely useless as a description.

Agreed.

 

[Jazz573]

If some people consider Dark Souls an CRPG shouldn't they also consider Dragon Quest and Final Fantasy CRPGs because they're based on games like Wizardry and Ultima?



Agreed.

How about Console RPG vs. Computer RPG? I realize there are plenty of games that would fall in to Console RPG that are on PC, namely many oldschool Japanese PC RPGs, but these generally have been the commonly used terms long before the term JRPG was even a thing.

 

[REDSLATE]

To me western RPGs and JRPGs are separate genres and we'd be better off if we stopped referring to them as their place of origin and instead called them something else. As it is, defining a games genre from its place of origin seems almost completely useless as a description.

Right, just drop the "j." It's an RPG. I'm sure there are other adjectives we can use to better describe the role-playing subgenres.

 

[Jazz573]

Right, just drop the "j." It's an RPG. I'm sure there are other adjectives we can use to better describe the role-playing subgenres.

I apologize for freaking out at you. You're entitled to your own opinion. It was wrong of me to present it as fact, and I apologize for that.

 

[DOG3NZAKA]

JRPGs used to great.

Unfortunately, for me, I just think I outgrew a genre that stagnated for too long. In short, JRPG means, "same old, tired, awkward anime tropes and wierd Japanese bullshit".

I just can't deal with it anymore. They lost me.

 

[Adnor]

How about Console RPG vs. Computer RPG? I realize there are plenty of games that would fall in to Console RPG that are on PC, namely many oldschool Japanese PC RPGs, but these generally have been the commonly used terms long before the term JRPG was even a thing.

I would prefer if we only call them RPGs and then talk about the mechanics. Turn Based Party RPG, Action RPG, etc.

 

[Mobius and pet octopus]

To me western RPGs and JRPGs are separate genres and we'd be better off if we stopped referring to them as their place of origin and instead called them something else. As it is, defining a games genre from its place of origin seems almost completely useless as a description.

I don't think it is useless. I think cultural impact on art is undeniable. The culture of Japan being markedly different (not better or worse) than western countries has had a significant impact on their art and continues to. Sure, at they've always influenced each other, just like many other genres influence each other and for that reason I don't think it is significant.

A Japanese developed RPG that is inspired by western developed RPGs, that borrows heavily from western developed RPGs, I think is still a JRPG. I've seen western developed claim to be inspired by JRPGs. That is great, I think. They aren't JRPGs, they are WRPGs and the developers aren't misrepresenting their product at all.

 

[Jazz573]

I would prefer if we only call them RPGs and then talk about the mechanics. Turn Based Party RPG, Action RPG, etc.

I suppose that would be better. Turn Based RPG, Action RPG, Tactical / Strategy RPG, RPG I guess for ones that don't fit into those categories. You could further divide T/SRPGs into Real-time T/SRPGs and Turn-Based T/SRPGs. Also not all Turn Based RPGs, have paused time between turns, but they can still be called Turn Based RPGs. I forgot Dungeon Crawlers too.

Is Wizardry a JRPG or not? It did inspire many earlier JRPGs, so I guess it could count particularly all the recent Wizardy games made in Japan.

And as I said before the terms offer no room for RPGs made in China or Korea, both of which have their own traditions of RPGs.

 

[Adnor]

I suppose that would be better. Turn Based RPG, Action RPG, Tactical / Strategy RPG, RPG I guess for ones that don't fit into those categories. You could further divide T/SRPGs into Real-time T/SRPGs and Turn-Based T/SRPGs. Also not all Turn Based RPGs, have paused time between turns, but they can still be called Turn Based RPGs. I forgot Dungeon Crawlers too.

Is Wizardry a JRPG or not? It did inspire many earlier JRPGs, so I guess it could count particularly all the recent Wizardy games made in Japan.

And as I said before the terms offer no room for RPGs made in China or Korea, both of which have their own traditions of RPGs.

The ones made in Japan? Sure. But the originals made by Sir-Tech aren't.

But still, I don't like calling them JRPGs or WRPGs, it doesn't say anything about the game besides "It has numbers in it".

 

[Oddish1]

I don't think it is useless. I think cultural impact on art is undeniable. The culture of Japan being markedly different (not better or worse) than western countries has had a significant impact on their art and continues to. Sure, at they've always influenced each other, just like many other genres influence each other and for that reason I don't think it is significant.

A Japanese developed RPG that is inspired by western developed RPGs, that borrows heavily from western developed RPGs, I think is still a JRPG. I've seen western developed claim to be inspired by JRPGs. That is great, I think. They aren't JRPGs, they are WRPGs and the developers aren't misrepresenting their product at all.

We don't do it for any other genre though. We don't have Japanese third-person shooters and Western third-person shooters, they're just third-person shooters. I understand where you're coming from and I don't want to deny a genre's place of origins or how it's influenced or anything like that. I just think as they are now, the term JRPG is can be incredibly inaccurate in describing what the game actually is or how it plays like.

 

[Fdkn]

I like turn-based combat. I like having full control over my party. I like having an overworld to explore, not some list of locations to pick off a menu. I like having towns and NPCs to interact with, but not so large as to get hopelessly lost and not so many NPCs that I can't possibly interact with them all.

But those things are simply design choices, the last 30 years are full of jrpgs that don't follow all or even any of those rules. Dragon Slayer, Hydlide, Tales of, Star Ocean, Mana series, Ys, Terranigma, King's Field, Kingdom Hearts.. and I don't think we need to list more recent stuff.

Jrpg is a term that we shouldn't even use, it has no meaning.

 

[NolbertoS]

JRPG, to me signifies the Turn-based type of gameplay that japense gamers love. I grew up on WRPGs with Ultima 3 on NES. Then loved JRPG after playing DQ and FF I when it came out.

 

[Soltype]

The ones made in Japan? Sure. But the originals made by Sir-Tech aren't.

So you consider Honda's built in the US American cars?

 

[Adnor]

So you consider Honda's built in the US American cars?

I know so little about the car industry that I honestly don't know what to say about that

 

[Jazz573]

Something I would like to note, is that in Japan the term TRPG refers to non-video game RPGs like D&D. It quite literally refers to Tabletop RPGs. In Japan SRPGs are generally refered to as Simulation games, within the subgenre of strategy. Generally they use the abbreviation RPG, like we do, but for SRPGs they use SLG, the same category we would put games like SimCity in.

You might have seen on Japanese sites, abbreviations such as ACT, ADV, SHT, SIM, SLG, RPG, and that's what I was referring too.

 

[REDSLATE]

So you consider Honda's built in the US American cars?

I don't even consider American cars built domestically to be American. The parts and assembly process is so screwy. American auto hasn't been the same since the 70s.

 

[Tain]

"JRPG", to me, evokes Dragon Quest, Pokemon, Persona, SMT, Final Fantasy ATB style stuff. I understand that some like to refer to games like Dark Souls or Shining Force or Tales as "JRPG", but it doesn't make sense to me to group those together with the above.

I'm not a huge fan of the former type of game. I often like the aesthetics, but I find myself getting deathly bored of the battles in those games far before the game ends. So, sure, when I hear that a game is a "JRPG" my initial reaction is that I won't get into it.

 

[Mobius and pet octopus]

We don't do it for any other genre though. We don't have Japanese third-person shooters and Western third-person shooters, they're just third-person shooters. I understand where you're coming from and I don't want to deny a genre's place of origins or how it's influenced or anything like that. I just think as they are now, the term JRPG is can be incredibly inaccurate in describing what the game actually is or how it plays like.

I think we do have japanese shooters and western shooters, although we just don't use the terminology often. There is a popular Korean shooter you may have heard of - Crossfire (over 4.5bil USD revenue since release in 2007). Oh, it is totally a CS ripoff btw.

I don't think the way we talk about games is actually definitive and is just imperfect or fluid. Someone mentioned something about Korean RPGs not having a place within Western and Japanese genre definitions. But they do, the Korean RPG genre is actually quite distinct from JRPGs, but I've little experience on that front myself outside of one or two korean developed MMORPGs (I forget their names but f2p MMOs are apparently huge in korea + china).

Frankly, I think we put too much importance on genre designations and I don't think the way we talk about video games in terms of genre needs to be so defined. For instance, and this is a game I've never played but, Kingdom Hearts could very well be described both as a aRPG and a jRPG. I don't think the two designations are mutually exclusive. Genres are just groupings that describe things.

I recall having this discussion in a philosophy film class. I don't think it is clear cut. I feel strongly about my position but it doesn't bother me if someone disagrees about the way I think what genres are and how we ought to view them as.

So in short, I don't think the designation of jRPG is useless, but I also don't think it is that important to label it or think of it that way either.

 

[Jazz573]

"JRPG", to me, evokes Dragon Quest, Pokemon, Persona, SMT, Final Fantasy ATB style stuff. I understand that some like to refer to games like Dark Souls or Shining Force or Tales as "JRPG", but it doesn't make sense to group those together with the above.

I'm not a huge fan of the former type of game. I do often like the aesthetics, but I find myself getting deathly bored of the battles in those games far before the game ends. So, sure, I guess that when I hear that a game is a "JRPG" I assume that I won't get into it.

Dark Souls no. Shining and Tales games most definitely yes.

 

[Soltype]

I know so little about the car industry that I honestly don't know what to say about that

Just because something is made in one country doesn't make it a product of said country.Honda cars built in the US are still based on their japanese design, so they're Japanese cars.Same with RPGs, mechanics rooted and predominantly used in WRPGs don't become Japanese when used in JRPGSs.

 

[Jazz573]

Etrian Odyssey and Wizardry are both Dungeon Crawlers. Though I would call EO a JRPG mainly because of the anime art. Then there's The Dark Spire, which has no anime style art. I'm conflicted on whether it's a JRPG, since it quite clearly is trying to emulate the style of RPG Wizardry is. EO is also trying to do the same, but it has a lot of stuff that puts it firmly in the JRPG category.

 

[WickedLaharl]

Etrian Odyssey and Wizardry are both Dungeon Crawlers. Though I would call EO a JRPG mainly because of the anime art. Then there's The Dark Spire, which has no anime style art. I'm conflicted on whether it's a JRPG, since it quite clearly is trying to emulate the style of RPG Wizardry is. EO is also trying to do the same, but it has a lot of stuff that puts it firmly in the JRPG category.

Where are you getting this shit? Just making it up as you please?

 

[Jazz573]

Where are you getting this shit? Just making it up as you please?

Not sure what you mean? What exactly do you take issue with what I just posted?

 

[PantherLotus]

I always loved the old JRPGs (DW/FF) and struggled with the western sort (Ultima). As tech advanced I loved JRPGs even more, mostly for their art and original worlds. Then FFXII and FFXIII happened. And I love DA:I now. So who knows.

 

[Adnor]

I still say thet JRPG and WRPG doesn't really say anything about the game besides that it has numbers in it, so I don't really like the distinction.

But the connotation isn't negative for me, if the game looks good I'll play it.

 

[Oddish1]

I think we do have japanese shooters and western shooters, although we just don't use the terminology often. There is a popular Korean shooter you may have heard of - Crossfire (over 4.5bil USD revenue since release in 2007). Oh, it is totally a CS ripoff btw.

I don't think the way we talk about games is actually definitive and is just imperfect or fluid. Someone mentioned something about Korean RPGs not having a place within Western and Japanese genre definitions. But they do, the Korean RPG genre is actually quite distinct from JRPGs, but I've little experience on that front myself outside of one or two korean developed MMORPGs (I forget their names but f2p MMOs are apparently huge in korea + china).

Frankly, I think we put too much importance on genre designations and I don't think the way we talk about video games in terms of genre needs to be so defined. For instance, and this is a game I've never played but, Kingdom Hearts could very well be described both as a aRPG and a jRPG. I don't think the two designations are mutually exclusive. Genres are just groupings that describe things.

I recall having this discussion in a philosophy film class. I don't think it is clear cut. I feel strongly about my position but it doesn't bother me if someone disagrees about the way I think what genres are and how we ought to view them as.

So in short, I don't think the designation of jRPG is useless, but I also don't think it is that important to label it or think of it that way either.

I don't really disagree, the purpose of genres in video games are to group them based upon what kinds of emotions they want to invoke in the players and the mechanics they are using to do this. How things fit into genres are already pretty ambiguous. My problem with the term "JRPG" is that it doesn't even do that, by grouping all RPGs made in Japan under the term JRPG it doesn't describe the differences in mechanics and the emotions they invoke in the player and that's why I don't consider it a useful term.

 

[Striek]

Yes. It conjures up images of moe, juvenile characters facing impossible odds, bad writing, poor VA, gameplay systems stuck in the 90s and more.

I used to love them, now I'd rather play WRPGs all day evrryday. Which have their own problems of repetitive quests, mediocre stories but generally pair up with good characters, great VA and tight gameplay.

FYI for this discussion at hand I don't really consider the Souls series/BB to be RPGs at all, just action/adventure games that mix RPG elements (like every game these days).

 

[kagamin]

Not a chance, because JRPG and Falcom are synonymous in my mind, and Falcom can't be a negative thing.

 

[Soltype]

Yes. It conjures up images of moe, juvenile characters facing impossible odds, bad writing, poor VA, gameplay systems stuck in the 90s and more.

You should play FFXII, it's almost an antithesis of what you described.

 

[Striek]

You should play FFXII, it's almost an antithesis of what you described.

FFXII is one of my favourite games of all time

 

[abercrombie]

If asked about 10 years ago I would have said sure; JRPGs were not something I would be keen to delve back in to. My thinking was mostly they are console constricted and I had outgrown their audience.

Since then I've played a few janky western RPGs (IMO) and now I realize its really just a matter of YMMV.

I just played the Fire Emblem Awakening demo and fell in love with it almost instantly, I consider it a must buy now. I also really like The Last Story and sort of enjoyed Xenoblade Chonicles.

Bottom line, tagging a game as JRPG is a positive now more than ever.