-
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.
Gamasutra Opinion: "2009 - The Last Days of the Japanese RPG?"
- Thread starter Nirolak
- Start date
pancakesandsex
Member
discoalucard said:
You're talking about an industry where a company that needed to sell several thousand (as in less than ten) copies per volume to break even couldn't even do THAT. Comparing to the PC market (where companies are complaining about million sellers being pirated) is laughable. The pc gaming audience also wasn't built in a foundation of piracy, the anime audience was, and still is. You would be hard pressed to find someone aware of what they are watching who has not hit up a torrent site for a show.
Selling new pc games that no one has ever played one game at a time isn't an unsustainable business model. Selling 2 hour anime dvds for 30$ a pop to people who already watched your new product via the internet a year ago is, and thats why the bubble burst and that business model has largely disappeared.
ZephyrFate
Banned
You being stupid doesn't actually counter my point.Gravijah said:
Dwight Schrute
Member
Demon souls says hi.
thetrin
Hail, peons, for I have come as ambassador from the great and bountiful Blueberry Butt Explosion
This is a recurring trend. Normally knowledgeable people look at the dregs of the genre, check the pulse and declare it dead, while plenty of AMAZING innovative titles sneak through without anyone knowing.
JRPGs don't have releases at the same frequency as other genres, so their low percentage of releases seems to indicate something that isn't there. Not to mention that a lot of great JRPGs never hit America (Venus and Braves, Inazuma Eleven). Sure, I guess you could say that they're only looking at the American market, but then you're missing great games. How can you declare a genre is dead if you're putting so many restrictions on what you consider it's liviliness to be?
JRPGs don't have releases at the same frequency as other genres, so their low percentage of releases seems to indicate something that isn't there. Not to mention that a lot of great JRPGs never hit America (Venus and Braves, Inazuma Eleven). Sure, I guess you could say that they're only looking at the American market, but then you're missing great games. How can you declare a genre is dead if you're putting so many restrictions on what you consider it's liviliness to be?
pancakesandsex said:
The problem really wasn't the DVD model. The problem was that US studios had no chance of making a profit because they were paying way too much for the rights. On top of this, the Japanese stuck their hands into the pot as well, forcing US studios to do some stupid ass shit to cripple their sales. All so the Japanese can foolishly believe they're protecting their own products while exploiting fans in Japan paying $60 for 2 episodes.
Believe it or not, the current DVD model (13 episode sets or just straight up collections) isn't much better. However, the cost of licensing is much lower and not sweating dubs helps as well.
In short. Stupid US studios kill themselves and the Japanese exploited them. =P
cosmicblizzard
Banned
Segata Sanshiro said:
Okay, so it wasn't sarcasm. Still, I'd like to think I can talk on equal footing with most "expert" JRPG fans as I've played a good amount. He seems to have the advantage of knowing Japanese as he's played 7th Dragon, but I don't think that should put me way below him in this conversation.
discoalucard said:
Regardless of what it is, it's still part of the genre. For some it might be a desperate attempt to scrap up anything they can find, but there are some legimately looking forward to it because of the gameplay and not because they're super otaku weaboos.
I agree with you to some extent. I've been burned out on handhelds since 2007. I will always be a console gamer and I want more JRPGs on them. I want Grandia 4. I want Suikoden 6. I want Skies of Arcadia 2. I want SMT 4. Hell, I'll even take Wild Arms 6. If any of these games get announced for handhelds, I'd be very annoyed.
Ironically, I do like the blocky ps1 graphics and I do want a remake of FF5-6 on the DS. Yeah, they would be awesome on consoles too, but that's a pipe dream.
ShockingAlberto
Member
SMT4 was basically released for handhelds already.
Unless you place an insane amount of importance over numbers, which would just be kind of sad.
Unless you place an insane amount of importance over numbers, which would just be kind of sad.
cosmicblizzard
Banned
ShockingAlberto said:
Eh, it's not the same. Atlus seems to be treating it as a part of the main series but in the same way MGS: Portal OPs is part of the Metal Gear Solid series. I mean I'll still play it when it comes here, but I'm sure Atlus withheld numbering it because they have something planned for consoles.
ZephyrFate
Banned
the devs. came out and said it's not SMT4 since it's not set in TokyoShockingAlberto said:
it's more of a side-project
Hcoregamer00
The 'H' stands for hentai.
Steroyd said:
Probably one of the best quotes from a NeoGAF forumer....EVER.
Because it is so true.
Segata Sanshiro
Member
I believe at the exact same time they said that's the *only* reason they didn't call it SMT4.ZephyrFate said:
I loved how he mentioned Zelda Spirit Tracks but not Mario and Luigi: Bowser's Inside Story, which is probably the best JRPG this year. And before you throw Demon's Souls at me, I'm mostly referring to JRPG as the typical turn based battle, level up, go through towns/dungeons type of gameplay model.
PepsimanVsJoe
Member
Not being set in Tokyo seems like a weak reason not to call it Smt4 anyway. I mean okay yeah it makes sense since the previous games did but look what happens to Tokyo. After awhile it tends to either get wiped out or the better part of the game is spent in alternate dimensions, cyber-space, heaven/hell, or wherever the heck the developers can imagine one would find demons.
grandjedi6
Master of the Google Search
I prefer to think of it as the Link's Awakening of the SMT series, myself. Especially since the comparison works in multiple ways.cosmicblizzard said:
Segata Sanshiro
Member
Well, obviously there will be a game called SMT4 at some point in the future, but anyone looking forward to it who passes over Strange Journey deserves a good slap in the head, in my opinion.
pancakesandsex
Member
Kintaro said:
I didn't exclude those so as to deny they were a part of things, but when people refer to the "bubble bursting" it's referring to the tanking sales. Popularity of the medium has nothing to do with it, but the degradation of it's inherent value with the target audience does. Anime became disposable instead of the collectors item it once was. They still consume it voraciously, they just stopped paying for it. This distinction is important relative to the topic at hand because if they are still consuming it, the article author's correlation between the failings of the anime market and the supposed decline of the similar looking similarly plotted jrpg are invalid.
Synth_floyd
Banned
The exploration and adventure elements have mostly disappeared from JRPGs. Etrian Odyssey is one exception that I can think of and I'm sure there are more but most JRPGs are just focused on getting from point A to point B so you can see the next plot point. Questions like "What's out there?" "What will I encounter next?" always run second to "What will happen next in the story?"
which brings me to the next point.
The stories mostly suck in JRPGs now. I played Blue Dragon a few months ago and could only stomach about a few hrs of it. It was just the same typical kiddie, shonen lame plot that has been done a million times already. Not interesting at all. Of course not all stories are kiddie like that but even the new FF game doesn't interest me at all because it's really not likely to differ from previous FFs. Also, the article brought up a good point that all games have stories now and RPGs really need to have interesting ones to differentiate themselves from other genres.
Generally the genre really hasn't changed much except become more derivative, and after playing these games for years and years eventually I got tired of them. I still like a lot of Western RPGs because I feel they focus more on exploration and adventure aspects and less on linear, cliched stories.
which brings me to the next point.
The stories mostly suck in JRPGs now. I played Blue Dragon a few months ago and could only stomach about a few hrs of it. It was just the same typical kiddie, shonen lame plot that has been done a million times already. Not interesting at all. Of course not all stories are kiddie like that but even the new FF game doesn't interest me at all because it's really not likely to differ from previous FFs. Also, the article brought up a good point that all games have stories now and RPGs really need to have interesting ones to differentiate themselves from other genres.
Generally the genre really hasn't changed much except become more derivative, and after playing these games for years and years eventually I got tired of them. I still like a lot of Western RPGs because I feel they focus more on exploration and adventure aspects and less on linear, cliched stories.
Fimbulvetr
Member
Synth_floyd said:
....wat.
Synth_floyd
Banned
In terms of gameplay, themes, story, I don't expect the new one to differ much from the recent FFs and I wasn't interested in those and so I'm not interested in the new one either. I mean if I didn't like Saw 4, 5 and 6, should I be interested in the upcoming Saw 7?
Segata Sanshiro
Member
It's actually refreshing to see someone who hasn't paid any attention to FFXIII at all.
It's pretty different. You'd still hate it, though.
It's pretty different. You'd still hate it, though.
Fimbulvetr
Member
Synth_floyd said:
....You serious?
Saw is a single continuing story.
Final Fantasy is a bunch of different stories with different focuses and different gameplay mechanics. They only have the same name as a tribute to the game that saved their company(and brand recognition).
Unless you can tell me how X, XI, XII and XIII are the same. Please, I want to know.
Is it? Is there really anything in that game to actually find? Because I slogged through the first 10 floors or so of the second game (I'm not sure how many are in there in total) and I don't really recall ever doing anything in it that I'd call "exploring" or "adventuring" in any sense but the purely mechanical set of statistics and resources you get with a dungeon crawling game. Aside from, like, a text message about a squirrel dropping a generic potion, the only payoff for exploration in that game I ever encountered was a few more square floor tiles with the same forest wall textures that were on every other tile in the game.Synth_floyd said:
I mean there's nothing wrong with enjoying the pure mechanics of a dungeon crawler, but I certainly don't think you can attribute any of the qualities that you're talking about to Etrian Odyssey and not to most of the recent 'standard' JRPGs (Tales, Blue Dragon, et al).
(I don't really know what the point of this reply is, except to say that I don't think you've really hit on the real 'problem' here, if there is one.)
cosmicblizzard
Banned
grandjedi6 said:I prefer to think of it as the Link's Awakening of the SMT series, myself. Especially since the comparison works in multiple ways.
That's a nice way to put it actually.
Synth_floyd
Banned
The whole concept of Etrian Odyssey is to find out what's at the bottom. It's driven by you the player, as opposed to most other story-heavy games which are driven by the in game protagonist. The characters in Etrian Odyssey are proxies of the player because it is the player that is trying to explore the dungeon. So I feel in games like that it is your story as opposed to the spiky haired kid's story and you're just along for the ride. Even something like DQ3 I feel was an excellent JRPG that still had many elements of exploration and discovery without a heavy story that burdens the whole game. Some of the other DQs also did this well. Again, not every game has to have this "characters as proxy of the gamer" aspect but using this aspect allows the game to focus on other areas rather than just story.
And the point of the Saw analogy was that in terms of EXPECTATIONS, I don't expect game #13 or movie #7 to be too different than the ones that preceded it. Maybe Final Fantasy 13 is totally different than all the other ones. I haven't played it so I don't know, but the point is that I don't EXPECT it to be any different.
And the point of the Saw analogy was that in terms of EXPECTATIONS, I don't expect game #13 or movie #7 to be too different than the ones that preceded it. Maybe Final Fantasy 13 is totally different than all the other ones. I haven't played it so I don't know, but the point is that I don't EXPECT it to be any different.
Fimbulvetr
Member
Synth_floyd said:
Well it looks like your expectations were wrong since one of the things the FF series is known for is having each game be mostly different from the last iteration.
You could watch some videos of the different and clearly see how different they are.
I don't care if you don't like it, the point was that you clearly said that "the new ff" is "not likely to be different from the others", implying not only that XIII will be the same as every other game in the series but the completely wrong statement that the other games were the same to each other in the first place.
Which brings up the question of what you based your expectations on.
ZephyrFate
Banned
So wait, have you even played FF13?Synth_floyd said:
No?
Okay then. Point not taken.
pancakesandsex said:
Well, yeah. The author's attempt to tie them together was stupid at best. I just like having anime conversations.
The complete dismissal of an entire platform in the piece should have started and ended this thread though. Do I like the bad DS 3D? Nope. Do I still recognize that the DS is the platform of choice for JRPGs? Yep. So, if you like the genre (truly like it, instead of just liking pretty graphics), you would move to the platform.
That simple.
Also Gamasutra...
Oh yeah? Tell that to J.K. Rowling. She would love to be informed of this news. Let Nintendo know too.
I don't think RPGs are anywhere near dying. The problem is the games, not the genre. When you're saying these great/polished games are being released on portables, ....well, I don't own a portable console and neither do any of my friends. On console you're seeing games that are simply flawed. And I'm pretty sure they're still selling decently, so that tells you there's a market just waiting for an AAA title or three.
Fimbulvetr
Member
So.... same time next month guys?
cosmicblizzard
Banned
Fimbulvetr said:
More like next week. Gotta question the health of the JRPG genre at the beginning of every year.
OMG WHERE THE FUCK ARE THEY!?!?!?!11? *Goes to play Glory of Heracles and Sands of Destruction*
All recent FF games with the exception of FFXI (MMO) and XII (Matsuno > SE) fall into the traditional trappings of the JRPG genre though.Fimbulvetr said:
They have unique stories and characters, but they're turn based linear stories with some exploration often in the form of dungeons with non-essential rewards. The combat systems do change but they generally revolve around the limit break/overdrive mechanic, summons, and the same spells doing basically the same functions. They also in recent iterations have clung very closely to anime styled characters and game worlds, with CG cutscenes as the primary delivery method of major events within the game's storyline.
Matsuno attempted to break them out of this template with FFXII's drastically different combat system, some legitimate challenge, more open world exploration at your disposal, and a failed push for a male lead. Unfortunately he was shot down on some of those ideas and for reasons still undisclosed quit the project part way through, which is incredibly evident as the game quickly descends into the generic FF style after the first (very refreshing) 20 hours.
This underscores the entire reason people make such generalized "JRPGs are dieing" comments. While there are compelling JRPGs like Demon's Souls and Valkyria Chronicles being released those will continue to be viewed as "not really a JRPG" as long as Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest, etc. stick to their tried and true formulas.
For my money I like Dragon Quest's formulas. It has an old school charm I still enjoy sinking tons of hours into every few years. But Final Fantasy has never been that kind of series. It was always the herald of change for the JRPG genre. From in the introduction of the job system in FF3 and further expansion in FF5, the increased role of storyline in FF4 that culminated in the excellent storyline of FF6, to the massive CG wave they ushered in with FF7. Hell, while FF:Tactics was a very similar game to Tactics Ogre it was the release of the former that lead to a massive wave of copy cat SRPGs. In the peak of the JRPG craze Final Fantasy was the one progressively raising the bar. At this point Square as a whole is running on fumes thanks to a horrible generation changeover strategy, and so expectations for 13 (or any other upcoming iteration) to pick up the torch are pretty low.
If that wasn't the case we wouldn't be seeing as many articles like this. But we also would've seen FF13 about a year ago, 14 would be knocking on the door as a new MMO, and 15 would have been teased at the last big trade shows with the first big reveal planned for this year's shows. But it is what it is. Square Enix, primarily the Square side of that equation, dropped the ball this generation and as a result many people are underselling the subgenre as a whole.
Fimbulvetr
Member
Drek said:
1) X adds enough twists to turn based that it can be considered unique to other turnbased games, while XIII is really on the border of turnbased and action. It's like the devs said "Lets make this as close to an action game as possible without making an action game.".
2) What's wrong with being linear? Should I call all open games derivative because it's been done?
3) Areas with non-essential rewards? You mean like every game ever?
4) No. Having special attacks does not mean the game revolves around them. X revolves around the fact that the player can affect the turn order by prioritizing moves based on how powerful they are vs. how fast they are. It's completely possible for a single character to get 8 turns before an enemy gets one. XIII revolves around its more open action: forming combos, timing attacks more effectively, breaking enemies, switching your characters abilities when appropriate to the situation. These games have summons and special attacks but those are just more options that help out as opposed to core mechanics during battle.
5) Generic? Even with Matsuno gone(truly a sad day for FF fans btw) they game hadn't devolved into any animu stereotypes or anything, the middle of the plot was just non existent.
6) Those people need to actually play one before spouting half-assed arguments. The entire appeal of DQ is being "traditional" while FF is actually changing a lot save for the art style.
I agree with everything in the last two paragraphs.
SatelliteOfLove
Member
thetrin said:
Sigh...was hyped as shit for that when it was released over there, yet...nothing. Now it's Soma Bringer and maybe 7th Dragon. Grrrrrrr....
Anyways, yah, first paragraph is what's happening, even smart people like Zeshuk can stink up a room with ignorance. I am waiting for that big upswing in titles coming over though, but that usually comes towards the end of a console cycle; with that up in the air so far, who knows when that'll hit.
charlequin
Banned
Segata Sanshiro said:
Given that they stripped the number off the only entry to make it to the US already, I'm not even sure that's true. If they announce a game called "Shin Megami Tensei: Demon Wangs" or whatever next year and just don't bother going back to numbers I wouldn't be shocked at all.
JRPGs are very obviously not dying. It's a pretty stupid conclusion, there's no real way around that.
I do think JRPGs should expand more, and I feel like there's some merit to the idea that JRPGs that specifically target older gamers are quite in the minority. There's growth to be had there - I think you could really catch a lot of these older games who "used to love JRPGs" with the same style of gameplay if the theme was more directly targeted at them.
I do think JRPGs should expand more, and I feel like there's some merit to the idea that JRPGs that specifically target older gamers are quite in the minority. There's growth to be had there - I think you could really catch a lot of these older games who "used to love JRPGs" with the same style of gameplay if the theme was more directly targeted at them.
Fimbulvetr
Member
Vrakanox said:
zoku88 said:
.
Darkmakaimura
Member
I hope it's not that last. I don't know what it is, but I love JRPG characters so much more than WRPG characters. I actually feel attached to the characters in Tales of Vesperia. I felt this way with the Lunar series, as well. I don't think I ever felt attached to characters like this in a WRPG*. Plus, I'm kind of tired of Tolkein-ish creatures, especially orcs. Fucking orcs.
*Well, exception is the pencil and paper Dungeons & Dragons, but then again, I was playing with real people and a fucking great DM who believed more in story then in combat, bless his soul (he passed away a few years ago from diabetes).
*Well, exception is the pencil and paper Dungeons & Dragons, but then again, I was playing with real people and a fucking great DM who believed more in story then in combat, bless his soul (he passed away a few years ago from diabetes).
Garl_Vinland
Banned
Darkmakaimura said:
Yeah i agree about the characters. JRPGs tend to be more story or character-oriented such that it drives the entire gameplay (which is why JRPGs also tend to be more linear and cinematic). JRPGs are also sometimes closely associated with anime so sometimes they borrow the anime-style in story-telling and character development. Xenogears and Lunar are great examples of anime RPGs.
and yeah, Lunar rocks. I think Ghaleon is one of the greatest villains in an rpg.
Darkmakaimura
Member
The weird thing is, I'm not into anime. I like Death Note and Hellsing but never could get into anime. But for some reason, it so well done in some JRPGs. I really love the characters in Vesperia, especially Yuri, Rita and Raven.Garl_Vinland said:
Garl_Vinland
Banned
i think maybe once FF XIII gets released worldwide we'll see a flood of traditional story-driven japanese RPGs. i think it was the same with FF7. After FF7 was released and became insanely popular, a whole slew of JRPGs came on the market.
for me it was actually Wild Arms, Xenogears and Lunar that first got me into liking anime. anime and manga is such a big part of Japanese culture that i think some of the story telling and character development methods was carried over in making some of those story-driven JRPGs. how's Vesperia? It's gamecube right? never got a chance to play that one. similar to Lunar?
Darkmakaimura said:
for me it was actually Wild Arms, Xenogears and Lunar that first got me into liking anime. anime and manga is such a big part of Japanese culture that i think some of the story telling and character development methods was carried over in making some of those story-driven JRPGs. how's Vesperia? It's gamecube right? never got a chance to play that one. similar to Lunar?
The linear argument bothers me because i play all rpgs in a linear fashion(with the one exception being Oblivion) I'm driven by the story and i want to see what happens next. the side quests in most RPGs don't really make me feel like they are worth my time. I also just prefer an anime inspired art style found in games like Final Fantasy and Persona art to the Lord of the Rings, grey, realistic art style in WRPGs.