-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Can eastern RPG developers compete?
- Thread starter akascream
- Start date
See, there's two places you can innovate, game design and gameplay mechanics. You're talking about game design.
Except the difference is that, the game design you say that's being innovative, is what the genre was built on. That kind of "freedom" where YOU, the player, makes the choices that shape the world and story along with has been there since the beginning. The only thing that limited that aspect of the game design previous was technology. Technology evolved, so did the game design. The core foundation has always been the same.
...and game mechanics is obviousely in favour of eastern RPGs, unless you want to use the game mechanics of "click, click, click, click, F1, click, click, 1" or "Bob rolls a 20, you score a critical hit! 7 damage". Now of course that's all generalization to the extreme, but tell me, what games of the western variety deviate as much as games like Valkyrie Profile or Super Mario RPG in game mechanics? If you can name one and back it up, than I would be impressed.
RevenantKioku
PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS oh god i am drowning in them
akascream said:
Which is still given to you in most RPGs, even if its not made obvious or necessary.
I still stand by Power MOMO.
Think of it like this. Some western RPG's allow you to choose your race and class, and allow you to choose the NPC's in your party (if any) for role play. Some games like KOTOR and Fable have moved beyond that with moral role play. Fable has done awesome things with reputation, the economy.. the world system in general. They have innovated in terms of ROLE PLAY. When playing an RPG, thats really what I care about most! 
You want to say that because this eastern RPG uses cards for special attacks, while that one lets you push 'A' during a move to pound a goomba, they differ vastly in design. When in reality its par for the course. All eastern rpg's differ in mechanics. But they are all the same in terms of role play. Meaning they give you a very stylized character, and they tell you what he is like while you walk down thier predetermined path to the end of the game.
You want to say that because this eastern RPG uses cards for special attacks, while that one lets you push 'A' during a move to pound a goomba, they differ vastly in design. When in reality its par for the course. All eastern rpg's differ in mechanics. But they are all the same in terms of role play. Meaning they give you a very stylized character, and they tell you what he is like while you walk down thier predetermined path to the end of the game.
Kai Dracon
Writing a dinosaur space opera symphony
I see no reason why eastern developers can't compete with western developers in the area of RPGs - if they choose to directly compete, that is. I mean, really - when they chose to make a so-called "western" type game, Square turned out FFXI, which while MMO, also is a very western style MMO to a large degree. A big question is simply: would they want to? Even if sales of RPGs in Japan are declining, is the Japanese public going to create a real demand for RPGs that incorporate the elements currently deemed "hot" in the west? And aside from that, will Eastern devs feel the "threat" of western-style RPGs is signifigant relating to the sales of their games in the west?
Tabris said:
Yes. I agree to a certain extent. I do think, however, that, for many western games, gameplay mechanics are deeply integrated into the game design. Again, look at Morrowind and Deus Ex, for instance. The freedom the game design allows you, provide with many more options for gameplay mechanics. The combat engine is a part of the gameplay mechanics, and might or might not be tightly integrated to the game design.
No, I disagree. Morrowind (as a separate game entity, no elder scrolls) could've been built differently, and would've been an entirely different experience. Still a normal western RPG, but not an open one. Same goes for many other games. They could've implemented the same rules as old games and limit the player. They still would've been western rpgs.
Technology does certainly has an impact, not only on western game development, but on all development. It definitely allows for expansion and evolution along with innovation for games. Whether it has had a huge impact or a small one doesn't make a difference as the same technology has been available for all developers.
Ah! I was awaiting for this part. Because going through menus to activate a spell that will repeat a 15 second animation, over and over again is sooo exciting (yes, extreme generalization as you did.)
Western variety? How about Deus Ex and KotOR. Both games provide a certain degree of freedom in terms of how you approach the storyline, but they are radically different in game design and implementation.
HIT X HIT X HIT X WALK 5 STEPS HIT X. Hey, look, I'm almost as retarded as Tabris!
Yes, you're making woefully simplistic generalizations, I agree. Your argument rings hollow, since you seem oblivious to the concept that the kinds of criticisms you harbor towards western RPGs can be applied just as effectively towards eastern ones.
(System Shock 2, Deus Ex) compared to (Baldur's Gate 2, Planescape: Torment) compared to Morrowind, compared to Anachronox, compared to (Diablo 2, BG
A), compared to Fallout.That suffice? Anyway, I'm not really here for the main argument, since I love rpgs from the west and the east. I'm just not seeing a compelling argument here.
I feel the same way. It's really quite simple. RPG's are role playing games. While combat mechanics are important.. If you were to innovate in this genre, you would want to innovate in ways that push the genre forward.. that improve role playing. I don't see that in any eastern rpg's. There are things like Shouta have stated where he used players in different roles, and in FFVII you can give gems to who you want to play what role in battle, and those are role playing elements.. but at thier core, eastern rpg's aren't based on role playing any more than me liking to play as Mario or Link.
I guess they try to make up for it with a linear story, or character interaction. But there really is no 'interaction', its all prerecorded cutscenes. It's kinda silly actually. "Oh look, my character gets sad when that happens, I guess I'm sad".. "Oh, look that makes me happy". They are spoon feeding not only the story to you.. but your own character. They ought to call them Role Feeding Games.
RevenantKioku
PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS oh god i am drowning in them
Truth be told the only "feeling" I've gotten from most wester RPGs is boredom.
Like I've been saying, its just different uses of role.
When your whatever you call him guy was killed at the beginning of Baldur's Gate, is that really any different?
And there's interaction, its just a lot less different.
Even if you have different choices of dialogue in games, the choices are still pre-set and the answers are as well. Its just different paths to pick.
Even Baldur's Gate is much less role-playing than a P&P game.
Like I've been saying, its just different uses of role.
When your whatever you call him guy was killed at the beginning of Baldur's Gate, is that really any different?
And there's interaction, its just a lot less different.
Even if you have different choices of dialogue in games, the choices are still pre-set and the answers are as well. Its just different paths to pick.
Even Baldur's Gate is much less role-playing than a P&P game.
Tabris said:
You obviously missed my point (and even quoted the 'extreme generalization' comment).
I am talking in general terms.
And I didn't play Valkyrie Profile. It shouldn't make a difference as it doesn't dictate the trends or the direction the eastern rpg industry has been taking these past years.
Granted, there's variety. I don't think anyone is disputing that.
No, that isn't sufficient
Anyways,
See, that's the difference. Western RPGs take the literal definition for how they design their games. That's their foundation.
Eastern RPGs have changed the way RPGs (for them) are defined. It's not about you shaping the world and story, it's about you viewing the character shape the world and story.
So it's not about which is better, because both are valid, it's about taste. You prefer to be the person who shapes the world and story, I prefer to view the character shape the world and story.
That's not what I'm argueing about though. That's the obvious difference. You'll prefer one or the other, or maybe both. Doesn't matter, that's not going to change.
What I'm talking about is gameplay and innovation. We're no longer argueing the thread's intial point anymore.
Anyways,
See, that's the difference. Western RPGs take the literal definition for how they design their games. That's their foundation.
Eastern RPGs have changed the way RPGs (for them) are defined. It's not about you shaping the world and story, it's about you viewing the character shape the world and story.
So it's not about which is better, because both are valid, it's about taste. You prefer to be the person who shapes the world and story, I prefer to view the character shape the world and story.
That's not what I'm argueing about though. That's the obvious difference. You'll prefer one or the other, or maybe both. Doesn't matter, that's not going to change.
What I'm talking about is gameplay and innovation. We're no longer argueing the thread's intial point anymore.
That's all fine and dandy, but I wasn't aware we were comparing western and eastern rpg's as games. I think you help make my point. Western RPG's are Role Playing Games, and eastern RPG's are stories.
EDIT:
But that isn't fair either cause some eastern rpg's have really fun combat mechanics. So eastern RPG's are stories with varied combat mechanics.
akascream, look at the Summoner series, Deus Ex, the Drakan series, Crusaders/Warriors of Might & Magic, Shifters, Sudeki, Shadow Madness, Quest 64, Legend of Alon D'ar, Dark Angel Vampire Apocalypse, and so on. All these games are Western developed RPGs, and all of them have pre-determined characters.
Sure that throws your "argument" for a loop.
Speaking of this argument, why are you guys using the "playing the role" definition? That archaic thing hasn't been valid for years... Sheesh.
Sure that throws your "argument" for a loop.
Speaking of this argument, why are you guys using the "playing the role" definition? That archaic thing hasn't been valid for years... Sheesh.
"RPG" is just a damned outdated classification. It's understood what they represent; can't that be good enough? I think I've had enough retarded arguments against, say, nintendo fans who are absolutely positive that Metroid Prime or Wind Waker fit perfectly into the "RPG" category because of their arbitrary definitions. But let's please not get into that ;b
akascream said:
Like read all of my posts, I never once disagreed with you on game design differences between western and eastern RPGs. I disagree with you labeling one better than the other, both are completly valid and are a matter of taste.
What we're talking about is game mechanics. How the gameplay system works. Innovations (deviations) from the core gameplay systems of both genres (eastern and western).
I've played quite a few western RPGs over the years, but really couldn't get into them... the old ones love to throw difficult monsters at you early on, and if you wander where you're not supposed to go, you get extra extra extra difficult monsters. The newer western RPGs have some good ideas, but I don't like their presentation, their battle systems (usually it's just click-click-click), or the fact that I'm just wandering around, not accomplishing anything. They have some really good ideas with their skill systems and character customization, that I'd like to see adopted with a more Japanese flair. My favorite RPG series, the Star Ocean series, actually uses quite a few western ideas, in its approach to the Skills system, and your choices in how you interact with party members makes them like you more or less... and how it actually affects gameplay - the hero and a character have an affinity for each other, that character dies, the hero goes berserk and is stronger in battle. But the SO games still have a fairly linear story, a diverse and beautiful world (western RPGs are too dulled out in their graphics, and their environs are usually pretty cliche), character personalities, great music, fun battles, and all the things that make Japanese RPGs so great. I don't think Japanese developers should be at a rush to throw away their traditional gameplay in favor of western gameplay, that'll only result in a mess. Everyone's like, FF12 is gonna be more western in its appearance... umm, no it's not. Just because it's battle system is fairly similar to an MMORPG... actually it sounds more similiar to the Star Ocean games, except without movement.
What annoys me about this thread is some Star Wars game comes out and everyone goes apeshit. I guess it annoys me since I can't stand the Star Wars movies at all, yet it has its hardcore fanboys. The Star Wars RPG gameplay has been around for aeons.. and what I gather, there's only 2 paths through the game, good or evil. You could chose to be good or evil in Dark Half, and the SaGa games have all been pretty nonlinear. Those are both Japanese made.
On moral decisions in a game like Star Wars or Fable - I can kill a random townsperson, but usually it doesn't matter, since the townsperson to me is just as generic as a pedestrian in a GTA game. These games don't really give me the emotional connection like a Japanese game does.
What annoys me about this thread is some Star Wars game comes out and everyone goes apeshit. I guess it annoys me since I can't stand the Star Wars movies at all, yet it has its hardcore fanboys. The Star Wars RPG gameplay has been around for aeons.. and what I gather, there's only 2 paths through the game, good or evil. You could chose to be good or evil in Dark Half, and the SaGa games have all been pretty nonlinear. Those are both Japanese made.
On moral decisions in a game like Star Wars or Fable - I can kill a random townsperson, but usually it doesn't matter, since the townsperson to me is just as generic as a pedestrian in a GTA game. These games don't really give me the emotional connection like a Japanese game does.
In the case of overall gameplay innovation outside of genre consideration, I would say that eastern rpg's have innovated some. Mostly in combat, specifically menu driven combat. But I dunno if I'd call it much change. Random battles are such a design flaw, overworld maps are a crutch that game designers still use. Energy sources tend to be boiled down to potions you stock insane amounts of. The menu system itself is very limited in terms of unit placement (what is the point of a bow?). Mario Party has done nice things with interactive battles. I guess some games do some neat combo things. But I dunno that things are really that much better than they were when I played DW and FF1 on the NES. But I don't play nearly as many eastern rpg's as I used to years ago.
Western RPG combat may have not evolved much over the years because many of them, especially D&D based games, were based on complex mechanics to start with. Though real time combat has moved forward (thank God). And now that technology allows, things like world economic and reputation systems can be implemented easier. Streamed worlds are so much better than overworld maps we STILL see today.
But there are consequences that affect you throughout the game.
Almost like the newer games are improvements compared to old ones. Innovation?
Western RPG combat may have not evolved much over the years because many of them, especially D&D based games, were based on complex mechanics to start with. Though real time combat has moved forward (thank God). And now that technology allows, things like world economic and reputation systems can be implemented easier. Streamed worlds are so much better than overworld maps we STILL see today.
But there are consequences that affect you throughout the game.
Almost like the newer games are improvements compared to old ones. Innovation?
I find western rpgs to be much better than a typical eastern one. Eastern RPGs have great presentation, but I find that I get bored of them really quickly after playing them for so long. I loved games like FF6, Chrono Trigger, and FF7, but then again, most games after those never really ignited anything within me. A lot of Japanese rpgs are usually story and atmosphere heavy, with everything being given to you. However, it doesn't help that we've seen most of these stories presented nearly verbatim in the hundreds of rpgs that have preceded it.
Games like Baldur's Gate, Fallout, Daggerfall and Planescape Torment just provide a world that I can't get in most Japanese Rpgs. I love the increased amount of customization allowed. Planescape is especially story heavy, but it presents a story that I haven't seen done in an rpg before. The other games allow for a good deal of customization and you actually feel as if you're affecting the game world with your choices instead of being given everything. Depending on what skills you choose, battles and the game world can become more difficult or easier. You can be an asshole or the goody two shoes... Just things like this make western rpgs more fun for me.
Games like Baldur's Gate, Fallout, Daggerfall and Planescape Torment just provide a world that I can't get in most Japanese Rpgs. I love the increased amount of customization allowed. Planescape is especially story heavy, but it presents a story that I haven't seen done in an rpg before. The other games allow for a good deal of customization and you actually feel as if you're affecting the game world with your choices instead of being given everything. Depending on what skills you choose, battles and the game world can become more difficult or easier. You can be an asshole or the goody two shoes... Just things like this make western rpgs more fun for me.
Look, I'm not trying to seperate east from west, its just an easy way to describe those forms of design. Games that force a character and story on you aren't good RPGs imo no matter who makes em. So, yeah.
Thats what I mean (whether you like FF1 or not). The games haven't changed much over the years. Lots of people like them.. so if it ain't broke, don't fix it. But we were talking about innovation.
How are random battles and an overworld map such a 'design flaw'? I don't think it affects gameplay much at all... it may not be as seamless, but it's not necessarily 'broken', as plenty of extremely successful and excellent games feature this.
akascream said:
but they are seperate. Both are valid genres. Those two genres.
That's your opinion, great, you don't like having a character and story forced on you, awesome. So continue playing western RPG games, because that design philosophy is suited to you. Avoid eastern RPG games.
Thread solved.
You're against an entire seperate genre.
There is no longer a genre called "RPG", there's "eastern RPGs" and "western RPGs" with various subsets beneath them. Sometimes, some games will cross-blend the two genres, but in general, they are two seperate genres.
You're thinking that eastern RPGs should be like western RPGs. Where would the variety and innovation be in that?
There is no longer a genre called "RPG", there's "eastern RPGs" and "western RPGs" with various subsets beneath them. Sometimes, some games will cross-blend the two genres, but in general, they are two seperate genres.
You're thinking that eastern RPGs should be like western RPGs. Where would the variety and innovation be in that?
this thread is useless and I'll explain why:
Can eastern RPG developers compete? um...you mean western?
eastern RPG fans say why they don't like western RPGs
western RPG fans say why they don't like eastern RPGs
fans of both say what they don't like about either and what they do like
eastern/western RPG fans change their broad arguements into a fine tuned one that MAKES NO FUCKING SENSE
omg mario am rpg!!
western/eastern rpgs have no innovation even tho the ones i'm defending have none either!!
BECAUSE WE ALL KNOW RPGS ARE ONLY MADE BY 2 COMPANIES PER SIDE!!!
I post this after the two kids stop giving eachother the evil eye
Can eastern RPG developers compete? um...you mean western?
eastern RPG fans say why they don't like western RPGs
western RPG fans say why they don't like eastern RPGs
fans of both say what they don't like about either and what they do like
eastern/western RPG fans change their broad arguements into a fine tuned one that MAKES NO FUCKING SENSE
omg mario am rpg!!
western/eastern rpgs have no innovation even tho the ones i'm defending have none either!!
BECAUSE WE ALL KNOW RPGS ARE ONLY MADE BY 2 COMPANIES PER SIDE!!!
I post this after the two kids stop giving eachother the evil eye
The thing is that open design doesn't mean that the main story has to suffer, or has to stop being the focus of the game.
I'd love to see eastern developers work on the concept and see what they could come up with.
That said, as of now, I completely disagree on eastern rpgs being not good. I love some of them and look forward to many as well. Skies of Arcadia was such a great game, for instance.
I'd love to see eastern developers work on the concept and see what they could come up with.
That said, as of now, I completely disagree on eastern rpgs being not good. I love some of them and look forward to many as well. Skies of Arcadia was such a great game, for instance.
Actually, that's exactly what you're trying to do. Until you've been proven wrong. Then you tweak your argument, throw it back out there, and hope it doesn't happen again.akascream said:
Seriously, though, find a new argument, or at least a new definition for the genre. You're using one that hasn't been valid since like 1985, and it's not helping your case at all. If anything, it's making you look like a fool.
It's simple Gattsu. If you consider eastern RPG's to be RPG's then they are truly deficient when compared with Fable, for example. But if (like we've kinda done) you consider them to be an entirely different genre, using the name RPG out of habit, then there's really no beef.
Indeed.
Indeed.
understand me: I don't give a shit about any argument in this thread and think they're incredibly weak. and aboot Fable...all of gamedome was deficient when compared to Black and White, at one time...not saying it will happen again but at least wait till you play the damn thing before you loose enough intelligence to try to devalue an entire sub-genre in comparison to a single unreleased game from a developer with a (especially recently) spotty history
also: this thread ISN'T a eastern vs. western RPG argument...even though that was your (aka) intention...this thread is an argument between fans of specific developers that people believe represent a whole sub-genre...THAT'S IT. for all your attempts to create sound debate (i'm being generous here, especially given your responses) all you did was create a X Company vs Y Company fanboy bitchfest
also: this thread ISN'T a eastern vs. western RPG argument...even though that was your (aka) intention...this thread is an argument between fans of specific developers that people believe represent a whole sub-genre...THAT'S IT. for all your attempts to create sound debate (i'm being generous here, especially given your responses) all you did was create a X Company vs Y Company fanboy bitchfest
You think Fable is all hype? You are entitled to your opinion of course, but have you watched many gameplay videos or read many impressions? It's pretty much confirmed to be an amazing experience.
And if you think my entire argument rests on Fable, you haven't read much of this thread.
RevenantKioku
PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS oh god i am drowning in them
akascream said:
Maybe for you, but some of us have a long way to go to be even interested in the game.
Uh, what? Your replies are pretty nonsensical. I was attesting to the continued evolution of eastern RPGs and the inclusion of new/varied elements that keep things fresh, or in some cases deviate significantly from the precedents set in the NES days. So no, that's not what you mean. Are Disgaea, or Dragon Quarter, or Valkyrie Profile, or Vagrant Story, etc. etc., anything like FF1? Or hell, even games like, say, Xenogears/Xenosaga, or Suikoden 1/2/3, or FF8, or whatever, that share many of the same basic elements....are these *really* at all realistically similar to games like FF1/DQ1? They're evolutions of the genre, not games achieving success through simple gimmicky extensions of the NES precursors. This isn't much different from a lot of other major gaming genres.
lawl. ;b I hope Molyneux took a time warp back to the Populous days and relearned good game design in preparation for his current project. But that's yet another thread... ;b
Well, like we've kind of agreed on. 'Some of us' are fans of a different genre.
There are several there that deviate from your typical menu-driven rpg, and thats nice. But from my pov, many of the games you've listed play very similar to me, yes. And you have a good point, many other gaming genres don't innovate any faster (see doom3), but I do think if you consider all RPG's to be in the same genre that the eastern variety is innovating much slower in terms of role play. Thats really the only point I was making.
I REALLY wish they never named the genre, RPG. Some people take the definition too literal for it's purpose in the video game industry. Especially the way it has evolved on the eastern side. They just need to rename the eastern RPG genre. Just so we don't have stupid threads like this.
seismologist
Banned
I still dont see what makes Fable more of an RPG than say Final Fantasy.
From what Ive read, It sounds more like The Sims than a traditional pen and paper RPG.
From what Ive read, It sounds more like The Sims than a traditional pen and paper RPG.