JRPG= turn based game

>JRPG= turn based game
>no actual role playing elements

Whose idea was this?

Attached: 1565373537851.jpg (500x498, 42K)

Other urls found in this thread:

twitch.tv/Limmy
youtu.be/J39HPaLXBJA
store.steampowered.com/app/203510/Fortune_Summoners/
youtube.com/watch?v=fA9YByLdJZw
youtube.com/watch?v=zb-hqdaDCW8
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

>he's never played a set module with a railroading GM

>each installment in the series must have a different combat/leveling system for no reason

>turn based

Its not a problem, zoomer.

Attached: 1564148388723.jpg (461x461, 28K)

Of the Japanese RPG types:
JRPG with Final Fantasy style combat
SRPG with Final Fantasy Tactics style combat
DRPG with Wizardry style combat
Which is your favourite?

I don't think that was OP's main point. But yes, zoomboom away user.

>>no actual role playing elements
Are all zoomers so fucking retarded these days? Legit every fucking board I browse you drooling mongoloids have no idea what you're talking about
Lurk for 10 years before posting

Attached: 1564058693420.png (3065x506, 1.48M)

SRPG but more Dargon Quarter than Tactics/FE.

Shut the fuck up boomer

I don't know what the first two are even supposed to be so I'll go with the third one given how FF is garbage.

Almost like all those tabletop RPGs like Chainmail, let alone iconic RPGs like Wizardry.

But fucking Witcher 3, now THAT is an RPG, amirite fellow gaymers?

Attached: 1564065314967.png (1240x900, 1.06M)

Now you know why tumblr throws such a shit fit about anything with a straight white guy on the cover

Elaborate.

Item World let's goooo

>Mario is a role-playing game because you take on the role of an Italian plumber that grows by eating mushrooms and kills his enemies by jumping on them

Attached: Png.png (420x420, 137K)

Because genre definitions became retarded when games started becoming an amalgamation of several genres. It's venn diagram shit these days.
>X genre with RPG elements etc

placing yourself in the characters shoes and making noncombat decisions.

You know, except for the gameplay being distinctly Platformer and the overall lack of a story outside of a setting and a goal.

>JRPG
>Dudes killing gods and mechanical beings are eating magic while an evil clown turns Tokyo into an playground full of spiders
Fuck, I just want a normal life rpg.

So, Life is Strange is an RPG?

>you take on the role of an Italian plumber that grows by eating mushrooms and kills his enemies by jumping on them
Is this statement wrong in anyway? Do you not take on this role?

What do you mean by that ? most JRPGS have something that changes depending on your dialogue outside combat

>You know, except for the gameplay being distinctly Platformer
You're still playing a role.
>and the overall lack of a story outside of a setting and a goal.

Uh...ok? You're still playing a role.

Genre definitions are gameplay descriptors though, that's the important part you missed in your retardation.

Yes, it's a role but that is not the defining part of RPG as it pertains to video games.

>Role playing game
>Playing a role isn't the defining part

uh oh, you're a retard.

Not him but the growth of a character(by levels, new items, gaining skills etc) makes a rpg, if role playing makes a role playing game then everything is a rpg

>genre as gameplay descriptor
>not the defining part as it pertains to video games
It's two simple sentrences and you still failed miserably.

What part of playing a role in a game is the gameplay descriptor? It's broad, pedantic bullshit.

He's being deliberately retarded because he got his shit pushed in further up the thread.

Zelda is my favourite RPG

>zelda
>growth
You sword will do the same damage at the beginning and the end of the game unless you change swords

>What part of playing a role in a game is the gameplay descriptor?
Uh, playing the role. You said it yourself.

Or do you think mario is a fighting game because you jump on turtles? Pass the controller to a friend when you die and suddenly it's a party game.

Ah, zelda 2 is my favourite classic JRPG

>Ah, zelda 2 is my favourite classic JRPG
See

The only JRPGs I can think of that have basically no meaningful character customization are FF IV and Xenogears/the Xenoblade games, none of which are actual good games anyway

>You sword will do the same damage at the beginning and the end of the game unless you change swords

Unless you promote the growth of your character your character won't grow? Wow, thanks for the assessment, Einstein.

Why are you talking about Zelda 2 online if you haven't played it and don't understand any of the gameplay concepts in it?

Why have you chosen to embarrass yourself here and admit you're a retard, exactly?

>sword damage doesn’t increase with levels
Found the OoT zoomer

also
>growth of a character(by levels, new items,
>new items

Don't worry user most people know jrpgs don't have any actual roleplaying but the weebs on here will defend them because they're too stupid for crpgs.

>playing the role
not a GAMEPLAY descriptor, RPG was ripped straight from PnP RPGs as it was a transfer of many of those systems and mechanics into a new medium. It just retained the moniker and the association with certain systems and mechanics contained. The genre label is actually not the important part of the RPG label.

If you are talking about the old ones then we can say the got light rpg features, but that don't makes them a rpg

So does any weapon in D&D.
But somehow a Longsword +1 being better than a Longsword makes D&D and RPG whereas your Master Sword being better than your common Sword doesn't make Zelda an RPG.

>So does any weapon in D&D.
Stop being dumb, your strength affects the damage

You don’t roll in JRPGs.
The mechanics it shares with pnp is measuring the state of being alive and the auccess of attempts to end said state in numbers, much like literally every video game

You didn't mention strength anywhere in your post though, stop moving goalposts.

You play a role. You level up. You gain new skills, equipment, spells, and abilities.

As that one autistic guy is schreeching about, these are the gameplay descriptors.

Pass the controller when you die and it's also a party game.

Attached: Throb of the Demon's Heart is actually an unrelated spin-off and not a version of Wizardry (1200x1200, 1.07M)

Same exact shit with actual RPGs that give you ability points with level ups you goddamn retard. If you don't do anything with them or use them to improve your character, nothing will happen. What in the actual fuck do you expect?

Attached: 526.gif (500x250, 689K)

>all these weebs trying to do mental gymnastics to convince themselves they aren't playing complete garbage
Can we just contain them in a general on /jp/ or something? The quality of Yea Forums would increase tenfold. I say general because I know /jp/ doesn't really want them either.

>You don’t roll in JRPGs.
Go fucking play one. You'd be surprised how much of it is based on dice rolls/rng.

Growth counts as anything that can change the weapon damage

>because they're too stupid for crpgs.
Ah yes, the riveting, challenging and impenetrable high quality "gameplay" of CRPGs, how could the japs ever compete.

Attached: Spawn of Autoattack.webm (900x506, 2.85M)

Did you know that Limmy streams himself playing videogames?
twitch.tv/Limmy

the wizardry series is pretty much trash up until 6

>its an ignorant weeb thinks actual rpgs are generic bioshit style games episode
OH NO NO NO NO

>Bradleyshit

Attached: 1537800350124.jpg (232x197, 23K)

>t-t-those wrpgs don't count!
Every fucking time

>Final Fantasy style combat
Thats Wizardry 1-5 combat
>Final Fantasy Tactics style combat
Thats Goldbox combat
>Wizardry style combat
Which one?

Attached: 1507329376463.png (668x612, 635K)

What are actual RPGs then, enlighten me?
First person shooters with stats like TES or Nu-Fallout?
Half assed action games like Gothic?
Point and click "shooters" like the Ravenloft games or M&M?
A bunch of mediocre Rogue clones with the average quality of Castle of the Winds?
Cookie clickers like Diablo and its massive amount of clones, most of which unplayable trash like Silverfall?

Pray, tell somebody who's been playing WRPGs and CRPGs since the early 90's what's this supposed mystical standard of WRPGs.

The ones with combat like Dragon's Dogma or Dark Souls. Followed closely by the ones like Tactics Ogre and Fire Emblem.

>post game that is not a CRPG
>i-its a CRPG and i-it c-c-c-counts! im not a dumb weeb faggot that only plays easy popular garbage, please acknowledge meeee! i belong here! i belong here! noooooo its like being picked last for kickball all over agaaaain!

big oof

>JRPG with Final Fantasy style combat
This, the turn based ones

>>post game that is not a CRPG
>Kingmaker
>Not a CRPG

love his Eurotruck Streams

>no argument

define "role playing elements"

frankly Bethesda's are the most role playing experiences as you immerse yourself.

JRPGs without actual class systems don't deserve to be called JRPGs.

>What role playing elements do they lack?
All of them?

Attached: 1378128812.jpg (2000x2516, 768K)

>what's this supposed mystical standard of WRPGs.

>low level gold box campaigns
>dark sun shattered lands
>might and magic 3-8
>wizardry 6-8
>underrail
>age of decadence
>darklands
>king of dragon pass
>betrayal at krondor
>jagged alliance 2
>deus ex
>arkania 1/2
>quest for glory
>gorky 17
>expeditions conquistador
>most autistic roguelikes, for example DCSS, CDDA, ToME, ADOM, etc

just for starters

>frankly Bethesda's are the most role playing experiences as you immerse yourself.
I wonder who's behind this post.

Attached: buy it.png (1068x1080, 931K)

They can't all be as riveting as jrpgs.

Attached: Xenoblade Chronicles 2 UI.webm (1280x720, 2.95M)

A smartly designed JRPG doesn't need a class system because it will allow the player to build his own classes through effective skill assignment

Unless it's something super gay like FFVI where you can effectively give anyone every spell in the game

That too. Basically as long as character building is a fun activity then it's a worthy RPG.

>A smartly designed JRPG doesn't need a class system because it will allow the player to build his own classes through effective skill assignment
Name one that rivals a western RPG. In DCSS I can literally make a Goku character that flies around back flipping off walls and punching enemies across the screen, then throws kamehamehas and spirit bombs at people. Name one JRPG with that level of customization, not some min/max garbage like FFT where you just optimise your character into a gamebreaking killing machine in a game that isn't really hard to begin with. Maybe Elona but not really.

>>low level gold box campaigns
>>dark sun shattered lands
>>might and magic 3-8
All garbage, don't ever pretend either Goldbox games or Dark fucking Sun are good games to actually play through, let alone hard games
>>wizardry 6-8
Bradleyshit that is also just as piss easy as its predecessors without none of the charm and needlessly convoluted quest design for the sake of it, Wizardry peaked with 5 either way.
>>underrail
>>age of decadence
Legit good games.
>>darklands
Meme, mindless jank nobody actually likes
>>king of dragon pass
Hardly even a game.
>>betrayal at krondor
Good, but incredibly overhyped and on the road to become the next Planescape with how overhyped it is in the later years.
>>jagged alliance 2
Strategy game and arguably the only good one of its kind, which says a lot.
>>deus ex
As much of an RPG as Doom, which means not much.
>>arkania 1/2
Garbage
>>quest for glory
Other garbage.
>>gorky 17
Memeshit.
>>expeditions conquistador
Awful and completely mindless combat, probably the worst of this generation.
>>most autistic roguelikes
Which you can count on your hand, and are mostly the same exact game with a bunch of different names outside of the more far out games like IVAN.

Very nice cherrypicking and namedropping, surprised you didn't namedrop stuff like Unreal World, let alone Kenshi, 6/10 for the effort.

>JRPG with FFX style combat
>SRPG with Advance Wars style combat
>DRPG with SMT style combat
ftfy

>Open source game
Are you dumb ? Elona coming close despite not being open source fucking shames DCSS

>Hardly even a game.
excuse me what
>As much of an RPG as Doom, which means not much.
there are 10+ ways to just open a locked door

>Very nice cherrypicking and namedropping
>ask for the golden standard
>complain when a pretty large list of good games is dropped
lol what a faggot

>In DCSS I can literally make a Goku character that flies around back flipping off walls and punching enemies across the screen, then throws kamehamehas and spirit bombs at people.
And yet you can't make something as simple as a robot character in DCSS.
Or use guns.

>Open source game
that is in the base game, though.

>And yet you can't make something as simple as a robot character in DCSS.
Its called a deep dwarf of makhleb.

Actual role playing games have unplayable, rubbish mechanics so the trade off is not much better.

JRPG = story progression + character stats
There are plenty of non turn based JRPGs.

Most of them rival wrpgs in actual customization, including FFT. Similarly to their illusion of choice story bloat, wrpgs also like to give illusion of complexity by making every piece of equipment affect like 10 different stats when at the end of the day your build options still boil down to the basic physical dps/tank/black mage/white mage shit that's in every JRPG and it's only a matter of how many variants there are

>excuse me what
Don't what me, KoDP is basically a book with a spreadsheet minigame, and even there it's a lot more of a Sim/Management game than an RPG.
>there are 10+ ways to just open a locked door
There are also multiple ways to run through a Doom level, doesn't make it an RPG.
>>ask for the golden standard
Yeah, and I get hogwash like Dark Sun games and memeshit like Darklands, so much for your fucking golden standards, this is like asking for good JRPGs and getting a list of visual novels and Final Fantasy games, piss off.

This is completely wrong and it was explained to you why this was wrong in the post you replied to. Its not everyone else's fault you are just ramming low effort garbage into your feedhole until your candle burns out, the culprit is you. If you are not even going to read the posts you are replying to, what is the point of even trying to discuss it? Surely there is a jrpg hugbox on reddit you can post in.

>play wrpg
>has a shit story in the name of meaningless "choices"
>protagonist is a lazy self insert because muh choices
>no emotional connection to any character, they get no genuine character development either because muh choice and everyone needs to be killable
>play wrpg and it has shit combat

Wrpgs are mostly just murder simulators for sociopaths and brainlets.

Regardless of whatever difficulty you presume FFT or any JRPG to have, that does not negate the available build options within them any more than I can dismiss a wrpg for not having customization depth because it invariably doesn't have a high level dagger that can inflict poison

Miyamoto already said that Zelda was a rpg. He played rpgs before he was a game designer.

>There are also multiple ways to run through a Doom level, doesn't make it an RPG.
It does not have the same implications. How your build your character and your actions (not dialogue choices, actual actions!) have a pretty immense effect on how the game plays out.
>Yeah, and I get hogwash like Dark Sun games
Dark Sun basically defined what a western RPG is for the next 20 years, for better or worse. Every mechanic in a modern RPG is present in that game. I would say Ultima 7 and Dark Sun are the most influential RPGs of all time, but Ultima 7 is not really a RPG and just 2D skyrim.

>Its not everyone else's fault you are just ramming low effort garbage into your feedhole
Very rich coming from people who whiteknight a genre whose heights are TES and Witcher games and pretend shooters are RPGs.

>it was explained to you why this was wrong in the post you replied to.
It explained nothing, it gave an example and asked for one in return.
What retard would ever consider than an explanation of anything?

>wonder why western created terminology and genres don’t apply to Eastern games

Wooooow wtf why won’t the world adhere to my educational abilities

RPG means there's some sort of character sheet. Doesn't imply any sort of role playing what so ever.

>that does not negate the available build options within them
It doesn't have real build options, though. You can't do anything creative. You are just making your character super powerful within a few select archetypes. Its not like JA2 where you can make a stealthy rambo character and pretty much solo the whole game with a completely different play style. You are just making it so you can kill stuff faster.

>It does not have the same implications.
Oh it does.
>How your build your character and your actions (not dialogue choices, actual actions!) have a pretty immense effect on how the game plays out.
Oh yeah, a game where none of your actions amount to anything in how the game actually resolves until a last minute choice prompt(That also has nothing to do with what you did up to that moment).
>Dark Sun basically defined what a western RPG is for the next 20 years
Unfortunately, luckily though, most of its successors tried to make the gameplay at least a tiny bit better.
And if you argue that Ultima 7 isn't an RPG but pretend Deus Ex of all thing is I'm afraid I'm going to stop this exchange here, and not because you're wrong, but because of your fucking gargantuan double standards.

>has a shit story in the name of meaningless "choices"
The way you play the game is the story. Its a RPG, not a VN.

Imagine having a meltdown over losing an argument on an anonymous imageboard

Attached: you.jpg (211x239, 5K)

You're retarded.

>those aren't options!
>these are real options!
You should eveolve your argumentation method. No U is a shit one.

If I'm wrong I sure do not want to know what it feels to be right.

Attached: 1489180865007.png (535x780, 492K)

I want an RPG with SRPG style gameplay but with world "exploration" like a typical JRPG.

>You can't do anything creative. You are just making your character super powerful within a few select archetypes.
>It's not like JA2 where you can make a super powerful character within a few select archetypes so you can kill things faster
Bloody hell, do you people even read what you write?
Or are you actually that good at falseflagging?

Attached: 1520194258669.jpg (1024x1024, 92K)

>none of your actions amount to anything in how the game actually resolves until a last minute choice prompt
You are just revealing yourself to be a faggot that only played bioshit and obsidishit glorified VNs. You probably couldn't get past the first hour of Dark Sun and gave up, assuming you played it at all.

It doesn't matter what the ending is, its the journey. Betrayal At Krondor has a very linear storyline you can't really effect, but it feels open because you are dropped in a world with zero handholding and its up to you to explore and put all the pieces together. Choice-shit is cancer. I do not give a shit about branching storylines. That is just VN bullshit that can be hamfisted into literally any genre.

You play the role of a non-virgin in JRPGs, which I'm sure is a huge departure for you.

>"exploration" like a typical JRPG
What? The existence of a world map but otherwise it being completely linear?

>
>Most of them rival wrpgs in actual customization, including FFT.
You're kidding, right? FFT doesn't offer a fraction of the spell variety of something like Baldur's Gate.

Take for example the summoner class in FFT. Their 'summons' are just normal spells that are slightly stronger and have more range. By contrast, in Baldur's Gate summon magic actually involves summoning creatures to your side, which you can then command. You can also summon magical items and equipment.

Or take something like the following scenario you can do in Baldur's Gate:
>cast a spell that creates a sticky web on the ground, any one walking over that area will get stuck in the web and unable to move
>cast another spell to polymorph into a spider, which is naturally immune to being webbed
>walk into the webbed area and finish of the enemies, who are stuck and unable to put up much of a fight

I can't think of a single jrpg that allows this sort of approach to gameplay. FFT doesn't even have a single spell that alters the environment.

Attached: 1551612034579.png (446x435, 74K)

>Bloody hell, do you people even read what you write?
How is stealthing around the map avoiding enemies the same thing as making a character that can move farther and hit harder? You can't even imagine what an actual RPG plays like.

You don't understand progression in FFT if that's what you believe. That game is a lot like FFV. You don't really get stronger on level up (original FFV only increased HP on level up and literally no other stat), it's more about unlocking new abilities for whatever job you're using so you can mix them with whatever other job you feel like using. The whole system is designed around customization as you level

>b-but the game's easy!
you've arbitrarily ruled out the vast majority of JRPGs then, I can name the number of genuinely difficult JRPGs I've played on one hand. This is all deflection so you don't have to face the fact that your favorite wrpg probably doesn't have as much depth as Pokemon.

I mean being able to run around the world and go to towns and dungeons and stuff but battles are strategic. I know those games are linear that's why I put quotations around exploration.

Comparing to a game that tries to be as Pen and Paper as possible isn't really a fair comparison.

>You are just revealing yourself to be a faggot that only played bioshit and obsidishit glorified VNs.
>Uses BaK as a counterpoint
You lost all your credibility in a singe post.

the create-your-own-character feature that lets wrpgfags play as a tranny so they can self-insert easier.

You still haven't killed yourself?
And you still keep copypasting your tripe?
Do you really enjoy getting BTFO every single day?

>Comparing to a game that tries to be as Pen and Paper as possible isn't really a fair comparison.
Not an argument. All video game RPGs are ultimately derivative of tabletop games, since tabletop gaming created the whole RPG genre.

Why would you praise FFT for having such a boring spell selection?

>it's more about unlocking new abilities for whatever job you're using so you can mix them with whatever other job you feel like using
to hit harder and move farther. the 'mix-up' is shit like dual wielding or +2 movement.

Thing is that SRPGs are either linear adventures or military campaigns that are also linear.

>>these are real options!
You don't think there's a diffeernce between stealth vs engaging in direct combat? Jagged Alliance 2 offers that choice in playstyle, FFT doesn't.

Attached: 12388128123.jpg (201x201, 5K)

Dragon Quarter sounds right up your alley.

>Why would you praise FFT for having such a boring spell selection
I'm not him.

>Do you really enjoy getting BTFO every single day?
I don't see the part where he is getting btfo

It's a different set of options, they're still options.

>FFT options
>make a stronger character or don't

>the Xenoblade games
You haven't played any of those have you.

>How is stealthing around the map avoiding enemies the same thing as making a character that can move farther and hit harder?
How is avoiding aggro to kill enemies different from "moving farther and hitting harder" when the end result is the very same?
Or are you seriously trying to deny Stealth isn't literally a way of moving farther and hitting harder?
Are you also pretending that all your possible options in even something as simple as FFT are "moving farther and hitting harder"?
You do know in FFT you can also literally solve most fights without actually hitting anyone and just by talking, do you? And that's a really babby tier SRPG.
>You can't even imagine what an actual RPG plays like.
I can imagine it better than you actually, especially because I don't talk about games I know nothing about.

Yes, and you can equip at most 2 of these abilities at a time, making the choice as to which to use actually meaningful and giving you new options as you go, which stands opposed to the standard wrpg format, where the only meaningful choice you make is which skill tree you pursue and are mostly overspecced into a linear progression from there on out.

>your favorite wrpg probably doesn't have as much depth as Pokemon
oh no its retarded

Because you're a dumb discord tranny.

>wrpgs are good because you can avoid the gameplay!

No, but they intentional just make stupid shit because they think it’s funny.

Sneaking is gameplay though.

Well tell him what you favourite is.

>How is avoiding aggro to kill enemies different from "moving farther and hitting harder" when the end result is the very same?
The gameplay is entirely flipped on its head. Its like playing a whole new game.

sneaking around the combat isn't gameplay, it's avoiding the gameplay. you might as well just "play" a walking sim at that point.

Most WRPGs have dreadful gameplay, in fact looking at this thread it seems the golden standard for WRPGs depends on how much gameplay you can skip in favour of text boxes.

>wrpg format
>skill tree
i'm talking about CRPGs, not world of warcraft

youtu.be/J39HPaLXBJA

>The gameplay is entirely flipped on its head.
Oh yeah sure.
But having an Orator talk to people and convincing them to leave or desert to your side and win battles by pacifism supposedly isn't.
Having a Calculator stand still and cast magic depending on meta values is totally the same as using a Ninja and run around the map backstabbing everything to death.
Taming a bunch of plants and let them fight for you is totally the same thing as deploying a bunch of Squires.

BUT OHHHHHH BOI STEALTHIE AND SHOOTIE IN JAGGED ALLIANCE 2 IS FUCKING GAMECHANGING!
Turns out WRPGfags were the low standard brainlets all along.

Attached: 1489273530473.jpg (640x654, 71K)

>Or are you seriously trying to deny Stealth isn't literally a way of moving farther and hitting harder?
It's not, because stealth in JA2 revolves around enemies not being aware of your presence to begin this. You can do this by using waiting until nighttime to tackle a mission, using silenced weapons, crouch-walking.

You can't do any of those things in FFt, because FFT doesn't have any real mechanics relating to visibility or sound propagation. All combatants are visible to each other at the start of combat.

The fact that you would equate aggro with stealth speaks volumes about how ignorant you are.

Attached: 1549216076277.png (454x453, 332K)

MUH STEALTH
MOMMY LOOK AT ME I CROUCHED THEN STRUCK FOR 10X DAMAGE XD

There is no such thing as a WRPG. Nowhere is this term actually used. The only reason the term JRPG exists is to separate japanese games from western ones because they would all look like shit if they were lumped together.

>Yes, and you can equip at most 2 of these abilities at a time, making the choice as to which to use actually meaningful and giving you new options as you go, which stands opposed to the standard wrpg format, where the only meaningful choice you make is which skill tree you pursue and are mostly overspecced into a linear progression from there on out.
This makes no sense, considering FFT lets you grind out any job to your heart's content. Any character can master any job, with no restrictions

Meanwhile, in class-based wrpgs you have to make permanent choices about which class to specialize in, which permanently locks of the other classes. Additionally, most wrpgs have level caps or some other method to prevent grinding, unlike FFT.

JRPG = Menu based RPG
WRPG = Toolbar based RPG, usually with auto attacks

JRPGs are RPGs. When the story is linear, you play the role of the main character.

You can't do a lot of things FFT does in JA2 either, dumb frogposter.
Can you send one of your units to an enemy unit and turn them to your cause or make them doubt their faith or bully them through speech options? You can't, because JA2 doesn't have any real mechanics related to speech, negotiation and mental states.
Turns out cherrypicking mechanics for the sake of it means nothing at all when everyone can do it, but I'm supposedly the ignorant one.

Attached: 1529531007497.png (800x600, 1.83M)

Funny enough MMORPGs have more role playing elements then JRPGs since you have other players to react.

I'm pretty sure you play the role of the main character no matter how linear the story is.

>crpgs
>using a genre that's been dead almost as long as Jimmy Hoffa as some sort of yardstick for quality
Planescape has the worst combat of any RPG and absolute cringe Purple Prose.
Sleep tight dead genre.

Rekt

This entire thread is 'Fucking hate grapes, apples are the best, fucking oranges suck the skin isn't as good as apple skin!'
Its like you people don't realize how vague the concept of a role playing game is.

I think everyone in this thread is aware of this, but does it anyway.

Absolute trash with the exception of Deus Ex. Japs own Wizardry now. Are you frustrated?

>in class-based wrpgs you have to make permanent choices about which class to specialize in
Means very little, even if a single character masters all classes in FFT your ability slots are limited, in fact they're much more limited than the average WRPG, not to menton each class template applies different multipliers to your stats, meaning you still have handicaps and things you cannot do well just as in your average WRPG, a Black Mage for instance might be free to equip Dragoon equipment, but it makes no sense at all since it doesn't have the stats to use it well.
Implying all JRPGs are like FFT also does little good to your supposed argument, not to mention that you also open up a can of worms about arbitrary design, which all games are guilty of.
>Additionally, most wrpgs have level caps
Are you fucking stupid? You're saying FFT or other RPGs don't have level caps? Even fucking Disgaea with its gorillion levels has level caps you fucking retard.
A level 20 character in D&D is functionally the same as a Level 50 character in FFT.
>or some other method to prevent grinding
They don't, even the finished encounter design does very little since the game expects you to clear out the content available to you before proceeding, and encourages it too.
There's very, very little WRPGs that actually try to prevent grinding, just as there's JRPGs that try to do that, or JRPGs with the same finite encounter amount design.

Thanks for sorting the trash, user.

It's just a bunch of redditors on a crusade against japanese games, they make at least two of these threads every day.

>likes JRPGs
>says other games have bad gameplay or combat

what.

>Are you fucking stupid? You're saying FFT or other RPGs don't have level caps?
A level cap of 99, which is what most jrpgs have, is effectlively an unlimited cap.

Meanwhile, Baldur's Gate doesn't even let you go past level 7 (or 8, for some classes).

You can't think this is remotely the same thing?

Rekt

>You can't, because JA2 doesn't have any real mechanics related to speech, negotiation and mental states.
It actually does. There are some recruits you literally cannot convince to join you without the right stats or actions. Obviously you can't walk up to someone in the middle of a firefight that is shooting at you and chat them up to join up with you, only an absolute retard would put that in their game, but both you and your enemies can hire from the same pool of mercenaries and you can buy people over to your side.

Did you actually play the game?

Turn based is fun, only brainlets can't into it.

Savagely dismantling wrpgs faggots. I love it.

Why are they so mad at Japan?

Also known as ARPGs and SRPGs?

>A level cap of 99, which is what most jrpgs have, is effectlively an unlimited cap.
No it fucking isn't, don't even try to pass this as a sensible argument.
>Baldur's Gate doesn't even let you go past level 7 (or 8, for some classes).
Because that's functionally the same as being at level 99 in your average FF game.
Meanwhile games like NWN lets you go up into epic levels, when nothing in the game can even remotely compete by the time you get to level 18, people have posted a WEBM of Kingmaker, where LEVEL 40 ENEMIES can't last half a minute to a bunch of LEVEL 20 PCs spamming autoattack.
Taking level cap outside of its context is beyond fucking retarded, it means nothing, might as well argue about how my favorite RPG has guns and your doesn't and how that makes it a better RPG, it's fucking idiotic.

And FYI, no, most JRPGs don't have a 99 level cap, most go beyond, many stop at 50, let alone games with no levels.

>There are some recruits you literally cannot convince to join you without the right stats or actions
So does FFT, even SNES games did this.
>Obviously you can't walk up to someone in the middle of a firefight that is shooting at you and chat them up to join up with you, only an absolute retard would put that in their game
>B...BUT I DON'T LIKE THIS MECHANICS SO IT DOESN'T MATTER
So it doesn't have mechanics related to speech, negotiations or mental states, glad we cleared it up.

>You can't, because JA2 doesn't have any real mechanics related to speech, negotiation and mental states.

>Higher leadership (LDR) allows a mercenary to quickly train militia and other mercenaries, and to elicit more positive responses from NPCs and recruitable mercs during conversation. A high leadership is often needed to convince certain NPCs to do what you need them to, or to recruit an NPC who is willing to join up. Leadership also affects squad morale, as a very high leadership can slow the drop of an unhappy merc's morale, though it does not help sustain high morale.

>Can you send one of your units to an enemy unit and turn them to your cause or make them doubt their faith or bully them through speech options?
Funny, that sort of highlights the issue with FFT's mechanics. An orator convinces enemies to join them by...moving close to them, but instead of selecting the 'attack' option, you select the 'entice' option. Functionally, it's identical to attacking. Because convincing an enemy to join your cause totally takes the same amount of time as drawing your bow or swinging your sword. That's how negotiation works, right?

The same applies to the "make them doubt their faith or bully them through speech" options which function just like debuffs.

Furthermore, entice is almost always inferior to attacking, because it has an extremely low % of success of something like 20% whrereas most damaging attacks have an 80-100% of succeeding. What's more, enticing units generally serves no purpose, since you can only bring 4 or 5 units to a mission, and enemies typically have worse builds than units that you build up from the ground.

Attached: 1553466874959.png (446x435, 250K)

But is really fun compared to Western turn based games? All you do is press A and heal sometimes. In JRPGs it's usually the linear story that's the main presentation and the gameplay is just okay.

>Xenoblade
>No meaningful Character Customization
You haven't actually played a Xenoblade game have you

Attached: 1514760370249.gif (500x232, 1.56M)

>in the middle of a firefight
>leave cover to go have a friendly chat with an enemy combatant, immediately receiving multiple fatal bullet wounds
>crawl over to hostile mercenary in a bloody heap
>"Excuse me sir, do you have a moment to talk about Christ?"
Weebs are subhuman retards, there is no other explanation.

>So it doesn't have mechanics related to speech, negotiations or mental states
It literally has charisma type stats.

>Western turn based games
Aside from strategy this isn't really a thing. Real time with pause is the best you'll get.

Beats me, what boggles the mind even more are the "arguments" in these threads.
Either they're a bunch of kids trying to get some ebin upboat on Yea Forums or they're legitimately stupid bitter neckbeards who can't enjoy vidya.
I like WRPGs and JRPGs equally, some games do better things than others and viceversa, like any genre, but here we are, don't really know how it all started either, I guess it's the equivalent of SHMUPfags' burning hatred for Euroshmups, but for RPGs.

>Because that's functionally the same as being at level 99 in your average FF game.
No, it isn't. You can't even cast most D&D spells at that level.

I'm not even going to bother with the rest of your post because you clearly have no idea what you're talking about.

>>>might and magic 3-8
>All garbage
now look you uncultured NIGGER THAT'S FUCKING WRONG

WRPG-Kun, I tell you this for your own sake, stop pretending that some mechanical designs supposedly make more sense than others, I massacre you on this point every damn time.
You don't even play videogames.

pretending to be retarded is ok as long as you're having fun

>>Western turn based games
>Aside from strategy this isn't really a thing.

Turn-based wrpgs released in just the last few years (there are more):
>Blackguards 1 and 2
>Divinity: Original Sin 1 and 2
>Shadowrun Returns, Dragonfall and Hong Kong
>Expeditions: Conquistador and Viking

You really have no clue what you're talking about, do you?

Attached: 1552511682265.jpg (645x729, 81K)

>You can't even cast most D&D spells at that level.
Boo fucking hoo, maybe because it's a low level campaign you fucking drooling imbecile?
Are you seriously implying a level 10 cap in a game is not the same exact equivalent in term of development as a level 99 cap in a game with a completely different set of mechanics and balance?
Are you that fucking dumb?

Underrail just got an expac like 2 minutes ago and its one of the best turn-based RPGs ever made.

You got me on some of those, but Shadowrun and Expeditions both classify as strategy/tactics.
I'll concede defeat on this one though, I didn't think it through.

You haven't even began to refute any point he's made

There is a strategy in HoMM that is entirely built around this mechanic.

>>he's never played a set module with a bad GM
fixed that for ya

The only good M&M games are HoMM.

Attached: yfw no power liches.jpg (439x373, 57K)

>It's a "someone claims JRPGs ONLY have turn-based combat" thread.
Why do we have to do this song and dance every time?

Attached: permanent state of despair.jpg (840x700, 368K)

>Shadowrun and Expeditions both classify as strategy/tactics.
No, they don't. Wrpgs don't have the rigid distinction between 'menu-based' and 'srpg' that turn-based jrpgs use. Outside of Wizardry-likes, most every turn-based wrpg uses a tactical grid.

>Shadowrun and Expeditions both classify as strategy/tactics
RPGs are a sub-genre of strategy. RPGs are literally squad-based tactical games, every single one. Let me guess, you think tactics means a game where you move around on a grid.

I already did, I do it nearly every day.
Suck your cock more will ya?

Name one jrpg with normal combat

Hot take: The JRPGs without turn-based combat are just action games and you're retarded.

>most every turn-based wrpg uses a tactical grid
I know. But that makes them SRPGs, although they often differ from how the japanese makes them.

>RPGs are a sub-genre of strategy
HAHA. No.
>RPGs are squad based, every single one
And that's where you're wrong. Even if they all were then it still wouldn't be a sub-genre of strategy. A sub genre of tactics, maybe.

That automatically invalidates most of the WRPGs ever made, not a good move to make.

What the fuck is "normal" combat?
So taking away turn-based stuff makes it not japanese anymore?
By this definition wizardry is a JRPG.

>normal combat
What the fuck is wrong with you?
As for an example of a JRPG that isn't turn based:
Final Fantasy games that employ an ATB gauge system.

How so? What do you mean?

Did I imply otherwise?
The railroading was important to context, not that it's shitty to do.

>By this definition wizardry is a JRPG
It takes more traits than just being turn based for something to be a JRPG. A distinctive "in battle" and "outside battle" difference being one of them.

If the roleplaying is the main focus, its a RPG. This is why Deus Ex is a RPG and not a FPS. If action is the focus, its an action game. This is why the YS series are action games and not RPGs.
>So taking away turn-based stuff makes it not japanese anymore?
No.

>If the roleplaying is the main focus, its a RPG
Wrong. RPG means there's character sheets involved somehow.
Games can have multiple genres, and I agree that the one in focus is the game's primary genre.

>WRPG you're always the chosenborne
>Generic forced tasks till endgame leaving a shallow choice

Whose idea was this?

>Wrong. RPG means there's character sheets involved somehow.
So wikipedia and game developers are wrong?

>If the roleplaying
Roleplaying is as functional as the system it is based on, which means it must be turn based.
>This is why Deus Ex is a RPG and not a FPS. If action is the focus, its an action game.
Except Deus Ex is almost entirely action focused, by your stupid logic then Monkey Island, Amerzone and Life is Strange are all RPGs because MUH FOCUS ON """"""""CHOICES"""""""".

usually, yes

You are so far up your own ass.

>So wikipedia and game developers are wrong?
Yes.

>Games can have multiple genres
There are only 3 genres, action, adventure, and strategy. Everything else is a sub-genre. If a game has bad strategy (decision making in some form) we can conclude its a bad RPG. It may be a good action game, but its a shit RPG. Finding and equipping gear does not make a game a good RPG. YS is a shit RPG and a good action game. The RPG mechanics are so light its retarded to consider it a RPG.

>There are only 3 genres, action, adventure, and strategy
Now that's fucking bullshit, genres are more specific than that.

Good Go...*ahem* user, Developers are never wrong.

Attached: You WILL climb it.png (830x315, 362K)

These little conversations are so funny to me, you two convening back and forth because you don't actually have an argument to bring forward to the opposition. You're like a couple of catty bitches, gossiping about people. Silly me though, whoda thunk weebs are giant pussys?

Jesus christ this thread is full of people who think they know what they're talking about but are clearly a chaotic mess of a human being.
I'm out.
You're all fucking retarded.
WRPG fans especially have something wrong with them.

Yes. It's a pretty simple pattern to pick up on if you just look at what most RPGs have in common. It certainly isn't roleplaying.

why do jrpgfags think that playing elemental rps and healing when low is some type genius activity?

Attached: 1548009667535.jpg (421x294, 31K)

Nobody thinks that's genius activity.

>Except Deus Ex is almost entirely action focused
Deus Ex is about making decisions on how to build your character and how to efficiently traverse the map and approach hazards, all of which have a very large magnitude of solutions which all produce widely different results. If you play it like an FPS you are probably going to have a bad time. Even when taking an aggressive approach you need to decide how to use your resources effectively, like blowing open doors or setting traps.

>Monkey Island
That's an adventure game.
>Amerzone
never heard of it
>Life is Strange
VNs are not games.

This isn't rocket science.

What statistic of jrpg fans do you unironically think have lost their virginity? I'd say less than 1 percent desu.

>genres are more specific than that.
No, you are thinking of sub-genres. Name one other genre that does not fall under one or more of those three categories.

>Action
physical challenge
>Adventure
exploration
>Strategy
decision making

These are the only three ways to present gameplay.

>WRPG fans especially have something wrong with them.
I'm a WRPG fan and I don't really support any of this silly shitposting, it's just a bunch of chronic redditor shitposters who want to rile shit up for the sake of (You)s, it's been like this since a year.
Unfortunately, Yea Forums being Yea Forums means even low energy reposts of reposts of reposts of low tier shitposts get 400+ replies because people here think feeding the trolls achieves something other than shitting the board further.
Not to mention jannies doing it for free when this kind of daily spam should be the first thing to eradicate.

They've stagnated their reflexes with constant masturbation so anything in real time is a no no for them. Got to take 5 mins a turn to figure out what order you should buff buff attack in.

Puzzle games
>But that's just decision making

You can have your two-dimensional triangle and place all games somewhere in it, but it's not what genres are.

>Puzzle games
>But that's just decision making
Puzzle games are indeed strategy. Some bad puzzle games, like Tetris, are actually action games and not puzzles at all, however.

>but it's not what genres are
Yes they are.

One thing is for certain. A shit ton of people in this thread have no clue what roleplaying is.

How you play the role is the defining element of an RPG. If you're just thrust into a defined character with no ability to roleplay then that's not a RPG.

Let me define roleplaying. Roleplaying is like acting in a play except your role is entirely improvisational. Leveling, combat, statistics, etc. are all rules that govern your role in the setting you're roleplaying within. The rules are not what define what a RPG is. It's how the game is played. For instance, leveling is just a mechanic to emulate your character's growth. It was never intended to gate access to better gear and zones like most games these days. There are plenty of games that don't use leveling as a mechanic in RPGs because it's not necessary. The actual roleplaying aspect of the game is you, as the player, making decisions within the plot of the game as you think that character would act in any given situation within the restriction of the rules and character you are playing. So when you're playing a game and the narrative is entirely driven by cut scenes and your actions have no influence except to get you to the next cut scene then you're not really roleplaying. You're just in a game that's gating you from the next chapter of the story until you meet the next requirement so you can see the next part.

Which brings us to the point that none of these games are true RPGs. They're just emulating as best they can the actual roleplaying experience as haphazardly and ignorant as that may be.

>Yes they are
No. Genres tell you what kind of content you can expect from the game. Similar to how a book genre tell you what content you can expect from a book. Same goes for movies.

What you're "measuring" is simply where a game is on a two-dimensional scale

Attached: Unavngivet.png (942x601, 14K)

Attached: 1537260271572.png (579x3264, 143K)

>No role playing elements
>Core source of engagement comes from the narrative progression of the character who's role you are playing

What did OP mean by this

>How you play the role is the defining element of an RPG
No it's not. An RPG is defined by having character sheets.

Meaningful dialogue decisions

I bet you think Mass Effect is an RPG

It is.

We need to let all those LARP'ers know then.

re-writting history , the post

It's more of an RPG than a cinematic turn-based tactics game regardless of how shitty it is

>Genres tell you what kind of content you can expect from the game

Yes, and my model does that perfectly. I'm sorry you base your enjoyment of a video game based on some sort of arbitrary branding, but that does not make your opinion valid. Some day I hope you can ascend to a higher spiritual plane.

>Similar to how a book genre tell you what content you can expect from a book
There are only two book genres.
>Literature
>Garbage for sub-humans

You are all retarded. A "Role playing game" is a tabletop game. In the context of video games, it's a simulation of that, and FF1 is just as much of a simulation of of a role-playing game as Baldur's Gate is. Mario is obviously not a simulation of a role-playing game even though you "hurf durf play the role of mario". There are books on this topic, I suggest reading them.

Attached: mario at the fish store.jpg (660x1146, 102K)

>he can't distinguish RPG from CRPG
BEGONE ZOOMER

>FF1 is just as much of a simulation of of a role-playing game as Baldur's Gate is.
Wrong.

I've read alot of classic english and russian literature but my favorite book of all time is the dark tower 4.

>Yes, and my model does that perfectly
No it doesn't.
JRPGs are menu based, Racing games involve driving a car and RTS games have both unit production and resource management and be real time. These are all requirements for a game to have these genres and your model does not tell the reader these informations.

should have started with the greeks unironically

How is that wrong? FF1 is D&D. Right down to the enemy designs

Genre names are often bad descriptors, shocker

>There are only two book genres.
>Literature
>Garbage for sub-humans
This presentation goes perfect with your retarded "know it all" behavior that only serves to prove the opposite.

All your examples use the aforementioned techniques to present gameplay. You are just grasping at straws now.

The Souls series is a JRPG (Japanese Role Playing Game)
Change my mind.

But they are

DeS is a CRPG. DaS is an action game.

How can you tell, on a Strategy/Adventure/Action scale that the game primarily involves driving?

Attached: Unavngivet 1.png (942x601, 20K)

It's an ARPG, action-RPG.
The gameplay is real-time and action based, but has the character-sheet mechanics that defines RPGs.

Xenoblades is a JRPG and its action, being action don't makes it not a JRPG

It's made by the Japanese, with Japanese inspirations, and is an RPG.
It's a Japanese Role Playing Game

D&D isn't played alone.

YOU CAN'T BE SERIOUS GEOFF, C'MONNNNNN

This one is hard to swallow for many, but Xenoblade Chronicles (I haven't played the older ones) is a WRPG.

JRPG means "Japanese-style RPG". Japanese style being menu based and with distinct in-combat and out-of-combat.

Technically you're not alone. You have an entire party.

>This presentation goes perfect with your retarded "know it all" behavior
On the contrary, if the author skillfully uses literary language to portray an interesting topic I am open-minded enough to enjoy it no matter what it is, and anyone else that genuinely enjoys reading should feel the same. Too many people today attach themselves to brands instead of quality. I'm not going to LARP as some sort of erudite, but I seriously think you kids are a bunch of ignorant dipshits that would burn civilization to the ground just so you can feel special.

Attached: 1531671209950.jpg (512x413, 31K)

>Too many people today attach themselves to brands instead of quality
A brand, in the case of literature, would be an author not a genre.

Thanks user, this is useful market research. My boss will love to hear this!
t. Bioware social media manager

JRPGs aren't RPGs unless they have a co-op multiplayer component and a way for players to make impacting decisions about where the story goes. Baldur's Gate is an RPG for this reason.

>Japanese-style RPG
you just made it up.

Mechanically there is no difference between a racing game and a cuhrayzee game.

>This one is hard to swallow for many, but Xenoblade Chronicles (I haven't played the older ones) is a WRPG.
Are you crazy ?

Not him, but why is that?

Who decided that the only RPG element are stats?
Do you not consider materia in FF VII an RPG element? Junctions in VIII? Sphere Grid on X? Let alone the FFs that allow you to literally chose the ROLE of your character.
Or are you referring to suikoden 2's 100+ characters and virtually unlimited party compositions?
Or perhaps you were talking about persona games, where you can only perform fusions with a handful hundred of beasts with different stats and abilities?

>It's made by the Japanese, with Japanese inspirations, and is an RPG.
>It's a Japanese Role Playing Game

>Japanese inspirations

>you create your own character and assign their stats (typical of wrpgs, but something almost non-existent in jrpgs, where you typically play as a pre-defined character)
>uses a stamina system (a common feature in wrpgs since the 80's, even elder scrolls had it decades before dark souls, but far less common in jrpgs)
>uses a vancian system for spellcasting derived from western tabletop rpgs such as d&d
>uses a classless system (common in wrpgs like fallout and elder scrolls, but almost non-existent in jrpgs)
>story is told primarily through gameplay, like many other wrpgs and in sharp contrast to jrpgs which typically feature hours of non-interactive cutscenes)
>an emphasis on non-linear exploration (again, common in wrpgs, almost non-existent in jrpgs)
>enemies are pulled straight from western rpgs (e.g. mindflayers, mimics, myconids, etc.)
>armor changes your appearance (again, common in wrpgs, almost non-existent in jrpgs)
>you can kill npcs (again, common in wrpgs, non-existent in jrpgs)
>combat has more in common with old wrpgs like severance: blade of darkness than it does with anything else in the jrpg genre
>many other gameplay mechanics and features it shares with wrpgs

HMM

Attached: 1552946972299.jpg (700x555, 35K)

No. A game is an RPG if it has a character sheet of sorts.

I "made it up" years ago after observing what games that style themselves JRPGs have in common.

Thanks, that was all I needed to hear.

lol , sure it is , just like visual novels

A WRPG, Western-style RPG, is a toolbar based RPG that often features auto attacks as well. In single player variants the player often has companions that are AI controlled.
It's a tricky term because the WRPG came after the CRPG, classic-style RPG, which is a western phenomenon and was actually made before the WRPG.

What else would you consider a book brand? The publisher rather than the author?
A game studio is also a game brand.

>A game is an RPG if it has a character sheet of sorts.
Nope. The role-playing part of tabletop games comes from the multiplayer aspect and the process of the players interacting with the DM to collaboratively shape and tell a story. If these aspects are missing from a video game then it has nothing to do with role-playing gaming. This might be difficult to understand if you have no experience playing a tabletop game with a group of people and a veteran DM and just have experience playing video games, but it's the historical truth of the matter and people are missing out on an entire realm of gaming for asserting naive statements like you did here.

Visual novels rarely have RPG mechanics, but it's not unseen.

>A WRPG, Western-style RPG, is a toolbar based RPG that often features auto attacks as well. In single player variants the player often has companions that are AI controlled.
>It's a tricky term because the WRPG came after the CRPG, classic-style RPG, which is a western phenomenon and was actually made before the WRPG.
That is literally not it, that can be one of the definitions but not the only definition, Xenoblade chronicles is a JRPG

>Nope. The role-playing part of tabletop games comes from the multiplayer aspect and the process of the players interacting with the DM to collaboratively shape and tell a story
So when wargaming/dungeon crawling in D&D you aren't playing an RPG? The right (or wrong) DM will entirely remove NPC and inter-party interactions from the game and instead focus exclusively on combat and the mechanics that surround it.

>A WRPG, Western-style RPG, is a toolbar based RPG that often features auto attacks as well. In single player variants the player often has companions that are AI controlled.
>It's a tricky term because the WRPG came after the CRPG, classic-style RPG, which is a western phenomenon and was actually made before the WRPG.

Party-based real-time WRPGs like Baldur's Gate are modeled after RTS games (which is why they have auto-attack), Until Dragon Age: Origins in 2009, they didn't allow for companions to be AI-controlled, you were expected to control all party members at once

Xenoblade is nothing like that. It takes inspiration from MMOs. Also, unlike those wrpgs, you don't have full party control in Xenoblade, which is why it has have AI controlled party members.

The two are nothing alike.

Attached: 1551998688553.png (680x680, 124K)

Adding to What might be true for tabletop is one thing, what is true for LARPing is another and what is true for video games something entirely third. My observation that character sheets are what defines a video game as an RPG is exactly that, an observation. Games that call themselves RPGs and games that people call RPGs have some sort of character screen where you can modify your character's equipment and sometimes see the effects that it have on their stats.

Real RPGs don't exist anymore. Most games that call themselves "RPGs" now, are usually shitty strategy games, action games with shitty combat, or shooters with bad shooting.

>A game is an RPG if it has a character sheet of sorts.
That's ignorant as fuck. This is a character sheet from UFC. It does not make it a RPG.

Attached: UFC.jpg (760x405, 42K)

>Xenoblade Chronicles (I haven't played the older ones) is a WRPG.

Attached: bait.png (343x531, 12K)

>Party-based real-time WRPGs like Baldur's Gate
You seem to have misunderstood. Baldur's Gate is not a WRPG. It's a CRPG. Another genre that originates from the west. The WRPG formula shines through in singleplayer formant with games like Dragon Age, like you point out, and otherwise also in MMOs. The genre is as old as the classic Might and Magic games though, if not older.

A game usually doesn't get the "RPG" classification if it's not the primary aspect of the game. UFC is a fighting game(?) first and anything else second.

>You seem to have misunderstood. Baldur's Gate is not a WRPG. It's a CRPG. Another genre that originates from the west. The WRPG formula shines through in singleplayer formant with games like Dragon Age, like you point out, and otherwise also in MMOs. The genre is as old as the classic Might and Magic games though, if not older.
Okay? I'm saying that those wrpgs are nothing like Xenoblade Chronciles, which are modeled after MMOs. In fact, the whol single-playeer MMO design of some jrpgs dates back to FF12, which was modeled after the MMO in its own series, FF11.

>You seem to have misunderstood. Baldur's Gate is not a WRPG. It's a CRPG
Those 2 are not exclusive

MMORPGs are usually styled after WRPGs, but without the typical AI companions (most of the time anyway).

That's not the same type of brand. Author brand is merely reputation. He's talking about an actual brand owned by a company. Like DnD novels which is a brand but has a shit ton of authors.

>What else would you consider a book brand?
I think 'genres' like fantasy is a brand. There is less degrees of separation between Lord of the Rings and Beowulf than there is between the Iliad and Moby Dick, but Lord of the Rings is lumped in with garbage like Game of Thrones. Don't be that faggot that says "I'm only into sci-fi." or something. I'd rather try to be a renaissance man than put myself in a corner for no other reason than fear of stepping out of my comfort zone or forming some kind of retarded identity. Am I not allowed to compare Lord of the Rings with Moby Dick because they are different genres? Would someone start autistically screeching it isn't fair? What makes a book good is the artistry of the language and the depth of the topic it covers, not autistic shit like world-building or whatever. The same is true for video games. When we look at a video game, particularly RPGs, we should be looking at the gameplay, which is presented through decision making. Does this weebshit have good decision making? No? Then its shit. That was easy, lets move on to another topic. It doesn't matter if you appreciated the aesthetic of the game or whatever. The aesthetic is not the main focus of video games.

I literally have no idea what I just typed.

Attached: 1551286983314.jpg (952x960, 145K)

Precisely. Which is why saying it's an RPG if it has a character sheet is retarded.

>TWEWYfag is here
abandon thread

I was thinking in the lines of clothes, where a piece of clothing is "brand product" simply because the designer's (author's) name is on it.

>I think 'genres' like fantasy is a brand
Fucking retarded. Trousers aren't a brand either.

The "role" in RPG comes from character stats and RNG chances to determine how actions happen in the game. They're not about dialog choices and shit. Games with dialog choices are just regular adventure games.

What? Games can have secondary or even tertiary genres that are generally unaccounted for if they make up only a tiny part of the game.

>Fucking retarded. Trousers aren't a brand either.
If you use the word "trousers" you are a specific brand of faggot.
>captcha keeps telling me to identify trailers and trains as buses

Attached: picard.jpg (486x360, 10K)

>CRPG
>Different from WRPG
CRPG is yet another useless piece of nomenclature and marketing, it means nothing when the historical supposed "Computer RPGs" were games like Wizardry, M&M and Ultima, which play nothing alike and play nothing like IE games, which were already clones of Ultima 7.
Anyone dumb enough to still drink this nonsensical genre kool.aid bullshit in 2019 should be banned on the spot.

Attached: 1560715954587.jpg (699x456, 74K)

I've been thinking about this one for a while and I think I might have to go back to this post and readdress it.
>WRPGs like Baldur's Gate are modeled after RTS games (which is why they have auto-attack)
"Modeled after RTS games" is very poorly worded, if not outright wrong. Just because you have a top down view and move units by clicking on the map after selecting them doesn't make it an RTS.
>Until Dragon Age: Origins in 2009, they didn't allow for companions to be AI-controlled
Dragon Age: Origins is indeed a prime example of WRPGs. And plays much like Xenoblade Chronicles, some individual leeway and console-PC differences being taken into account.
>Xenoblade is nothing like that
It is exactly like Dragon Age, except with less party control, but the party members are subject to the same system as the player and function near identically aside from having different skills and specialties.

Brand's are owned by specific companies. That's the main difference. An author can be published by different companies while a brand cannot. That's why people like Sean John have their own companies. That's his brand. Or Martha Stewart who's brand was owned by Sequential Brands Group. They recently sold her brand to Marquee Brands for over $200 million.

If I said "pants" then the bong would have had it out for me.

>The "role" in RPG comes from character stats and RNG chances to determine how actions happen in the game. They're not about dialog choices and shit. Games with dialog choices are just regular adventure games.

Dialogue choices can be a part of "actions that are determined by character stats".

And tabletop games have had dialogue-related mechanics since forever, and even as early as Ultima 4 in 1985 - possibly even earlier - we had video game RPGs where dialogue choices were a vital method of interacting with the world and growing your character stats.

CRPG is the correct term. WRPG is made up and is not used anywhere else other than autistic social circles like Yea Forums.

>Games should not be classified
>Every game is individual
Sure, and races don't exist.

>IE games, which were already clones of Ultima 7
This is one of the dumbest statements in this thread. IE games are nothing like Ultima 7.

But the dialogue parts are not required for something to be an RPG. The combat parts of it is plenty.

>tfw play both JRPGs and CRPGs
What now Yea Forums?

Attached: 1507536702144.png (245x258, 64K)

A music author is pretty much owned by a producer, I don't understand why the same is not the case for books and authors. Different culture I suppose.
But for the sake of video games would you classify a series' name, for example "Final Fantasy" or "Elder Scrolls" as a brand, or would you classify something like "Square Enix" and "Bethesda" as brands? Something entirely different?

WRPG is redundant. RPGs were created by the west. There are RPGs and then there's everyone else.

you don't exist

Attached: 1545055969059.png (5000x5000, 95K)

>Play video games
Go back.

>"Modeled after RTS games" is very poorly worded, if not outright wrong. Just because you have a top down view and move units by clicking on the map after selecting them doesn't make it an RTS.
Wrpgs like Baldur's Gate adopted many conventions of RTS games, like marquee selection. Games likee Xenoblade lack these.

>It is exactly like Dragon Age
It isn't. At any moment in Dragon Age, you can pause the game and issue orders to all party members,

You can't do this in Xenoblade. You have to manually take control fo a single party member, by setting them as the party leader. and controlling them manually like you would in an action-rpgs. You can't control an entire party simultanously.

Anyone knows if Ni no Kuni 2 is worth it? I heard it's Dark Cloud ish. Also what's the difference between the Deluxe version and the Prince-something version?

>But the dialogue parts are not required for something to be an RPG.
Depends. If your RPG has a huge focus on story and character interaction, a lack of dialogue-related mechanics would be a glaring oversight.

Literally nobody uses WRPG nor CRPG if we are talking mainstream audiences. Skyrim is just an RPG to anyone on the street, nobody but dork nerds actually cares about the finer details of classification because only dork nerds require these classifications to feel superior to people who enjoy Skyrim.

Attached: 57c2630aaf9d7.jpg (750x844, 140K)

Technically speaking, no, you aren't. That part is an intermission from the roleplaying.

What you're observing is many people's misuse of the label and very little of the label's history.

Well, my point is that people 'brand' themselves. Maybe it was a poor word choice. I was trying to imply that sub-genres are largely meaningless marketing 'brands' used to target specific consumers that fall under that 'brand.' People fall into the trap of playing the same rehashed garbage over and over, even if it comes from a completely different company and are conditioned to the point where they can't play anything else. I imagine old CRPGs must feel like torture for people that regularly play JRPGs and I would be amazed if they could get through the character creation.

Attached: 11516702483_0c0465d29b_z.jpg (640x556, 209K)

>Wrpgs like Baldur's Gate
You're doing it again. It's CRPG and it's a classical trait of most CRPGs.

>Dragon Age allows for pause and commanding allies
A sign of it's western roots and allowing for CRPG fans to play their way.

>Xenoblade controls like an ARPG
ARPGs aren't played in the "stand next to enemy and duke it out" kind of way that WRPGs and CRPGs are.

True enough, but now you should be careful that you're not falling in the other way. VNs aren't RPGs just because you can choose what branch you're going down by making the right dialogue choices.

This entire thread has been shit from the getgo, jackass.

Imma have to go with drpg but more megami tensei than wizardry

>Technically speaking, no, you aren't
That's not how the industry looks at it I'm afraid.

>What you're observing is many people's misuse of the label
A word's meaning is defined by what people mean by it. The meaning of a noun can effectively be discerned by observing what people refer to when they mention the noun.

>True enough, but now you should be careful that you're not falling in the other way. VNs aren't RPGs
What other way? RPGs with dialogue choices predate VNs. And dialogue choices in VN about choosing CYOA-style story branches, whereas dialogue choices in RPGs serve a mechanical purpose: getting information from an NPC, recruiting a party member, bartering for a discount at a shop, etc.

Why are you even comparing the two?

lurk more before posting, you sound like a retard

>Technically speaking, no, you aren't. That part is an intermission from the roleplaying.
You're factually incorrect and ignorant as to the history of tabletop RPGs, D&D specifically. They were created as wargames first. "Multiplayer storytelling narrative" is optional fluff surrounding the wargaming and dungeon crawlers.

>That's not how the industry looks at it I'm afraid.
How the industry looks at it is completely irrelevant because what they want is ultimately selling you shit you don't need, so they'll make up anything in order to sell it to you, just like they want to convince you really fucking hard that Witcher games are RPGs.

>Imma have to go with drpg but more megami tensei than wizardry
Megami Tensei uses wizardry style combat. Then again, so do 99% of turn-based jrpgs.

I see what you mean, but I don't see it being the case in reality. Lots of ASSFAGGOTS exist but you don't see people, not even dedicated fans of the genre, play all of them.
Same goes for FPS games. A series like Call of Duty might have a cult that buys every release despite it being the same shit everytime, but that cult won't mindlessly buy games of the same sub-genre (Fast-paced arcadey FPS).

>Seething closeted weeb doesn't want to say he likes a jrpg

Attached: vBTwS4-XWDhWYooJSxFcuRbH6SOlPtCJSyskvlvH__SU7uPJDeyr6xPjbmNpB86lc1hiIiw_LJeBc7AH0eHlBg.jpg (235x214, 9K)

Playing the role of the character by making decisions. FFVI has as much role playing as a linear shooter

You seemed to be fellating dialogue so hard that I was worried you considered every game with influential dialogue an RPG.

I understand that the definition of words and understanding of concepts change over time when a ton of idiots misinterpret said words and misunderstand said concepts, but it's still a misinterpretation and misunderstanding as far as people who are fully aware of the history are concerned. No one with a grasp on tabletop RPGs would refer to anything while playing FF1 as roleplaying.

>selling you shit you don't need
No shit. No one "needs" entertainment media.

>Witcher games are RPGs
2 and 3 are action games first and RPGs second. 1 is a bit more tricky to classify.

When they were wargames, they were wargames, not RPGs. The "fluff" was literally what made them RPGs rather than wargames.

>Megami Tensei uses wizardry style combat.
It really doesn't beyond an incredilby superficial level, to the point that you might as well say M&M are wizardry games.
It's also interesting you don't even mention how wizardry also has plenty of different models through the series, probably because you didn't play them, nor any turn based JRPG.
>Then again, so do 99% of turn-based jrpgs.
Ah yes, Metal Max, Valkyrie Profile, Gunparade March or Unlimited SaGa all have that distinct Wizardry style to them...

A brand is different from being under contract. Most musicians are under contract by a publisher. That contract dictates who owns what. Same thing with most book authors. The actual Brand when you're talking about musicians is typically jointly owned by the musicians which has resulted in them getting into heated legal arguments as to who has the rights to use the bands name. Take Queensryche for instance. Geoff Tate was the singer for them but was fired from the band. But to make along story short, both the original band members and Geoff Tate were legally allowed to tour independently of each other and use the brand name Queensryche even though they no longer associate with one another. The court ruled that both parties may use the brand Queensrÿche until a court ruling or settlement would arrange otherwise. Since then Tate lost and can no longer use the brand Queensryche.

To answer your other question, Square Enix and Bethesda are the names of publshers. Final Fantasy and Elder Scrolls are brand names that happen to be owned by their respective publishers.

>Fast-paced arcadey FPS
that is not what CoD is

>No one with a grasp on tabletop RPGs would refer to anything while playing FF1 as roleplaying
I'm sure the people you have in mind when saying this also consider pen and paper dungeon crawling/wargaming to not be playing a role playing game, or at least insist that it's being done wrong. Fact of the matter is that role playing games can be played in different ways depending on what focus the creator/DM has.

Metal Max kind of reminds me of Wasteland, but way shittier.
>b-but the vehicles
who cares

Attached: drawn-batman-japan-13.jpg (1491x1678, 794K)

I'm not too good with the terminology of FPS sub genres. What would you call it then? The elements that puts it in the same box as Titanfall but makes it different from Battlefield and Red Orchestra.
Or is it because you're thinking of singleplayer rather than multiplayer?

You're operating under a definition that did not exist until well after the term "roleplaying game" was invented.

>Final Fantasy and Elder Scrolls are brand names that happen to be owned by their respective publishers
I'm glad we agree. A genre and a brand are two widely different things. A brand may well span multiple genres in fact.

Literally none of the above, play a non-japanese RPG before replying to me again, kiddo.

>What would you call it then?
A shooting sim with lots of gamey bells and whistles. Its just a generic multiplayer console shooter. There is nothing fast-paced about it and 'arcade shooter' makes no sense.

Doesn't matter, the definition came about from an observation of the original events. Wargaming is not roleplaying; these are two distinct activities.

Too bad nobody cares about Wasteland and it's also horrible to actually play, like most WRPGs, meanwhile people still play and enjoy MM to this day.
B...But who cares, amirite?

Attached: 1565406635758.jpg (299x259, 14K)

Neither do you

>sim
Nuh uh. One thing I do know is that there's a one dimensional "Simulation vs. Arcade" axis and Call of Duty falls well into the arcade side.

>There is nothing fast paced about it
Constant action in the form of few-second respawns and small maps guaranteeing you'll meet enemies within a very short time contributes to making it fast paced. For games that are less fast paced and arcadey we have games that have slow/no respawn and large maps.

>The only way you can role-play is through dialogue

>Adventure games are now RPGs

Try a table-top RPG sometime, its all mechanics. Even when you're just talking to someone, you have systems underneath it all that affect how each situation and interaction can play out, the role you chose for your character affects just about everything.

When you """""""role-play""""""" in, say, Witcher 3, its literally just a list of dialogue, next to nothing affects which options you can pick or what happens when you pick any given line of dialogue. You just pick it and he says it, whatever happens happens. There are no checks, there are no parameters that are affected by how you built your character that affect the outcome. Its no different than dialogue choices we've had in adventure games for over three decades.

Attached: 6a00d8341c652b53ef010535ce3c64970c-800wi.jpg (533x399, 35K)

>dugeon master witcher 5 is a role playing game because beardy big boy man allows for you to choose whether you get to fuck a dude or a woman and also you get to choose whether your softcore porn simulator lasts 3 minutes or 4

:^)

>It's also interesting you don't even mention how wizardry also has plenty of different models through the series
Sure, but it always maintained the fundamental system of inputting all the commands for your party, and then those commands being executed depending on speed, which is what Megami Tensei also uses.

What you have to realize is that while this combat system is now regarded as completely normal, that wasn't necessarily the case at the time. Wizardry came out when video game RPGs were still in their infancy. The idea to have a 'command phase' where you give orders, followed by watching those orders be executed, was just one possible way to translate tabletop gaming (which requires multiple participants) to a single-player video game. It ended up becoming by far the most popular system, at least in jrpgs, but that wasn't a given at the time.

>Ah yes, Metal Max, Valkyrie Profile, Gunparade March or Unlimited SaGa all have that distinct Wizardry style to them...
Yes, that's that 1% I was talking about. Or are you forgetting about DQ, FF1-3, Breath of Fire, Suikoden, SaGa, Golden Sun, Lufia, Lunar, Megami Tensei and countless other jrpgs?

>Doesn't matter
Yeah it does, otherwise you're claiming that the original roleplaying games aren't actually roleplaying games, then using your stupidity to claim that an entire video game genre which has its roots in the original D&D games is misnamed.

>meanwhile people still play and enjoy MM to this day
No they don't. Didn't Xeno only manage to sell like 5 copies outside of Japan? Actually, I think it flopped in Japan, too.
>Too bad nobody cares about Wasteland and it's also horrible to actually play
Wasteland is still alive and the original is frequently praised by big time RPG devs. The first game was recently remastered, and the series itself was rebooted and now the third title is coming out in a few months. the new games kind of suck though

I'm not having this retarded zoomer discussion.

People think RPGs are just games with level-based progression system

Lel, I just realized that there's lots of people here who think that if you dislike JRPGs it's because you're racist or don't like Japan or something. I don't care who makes good games, JRPGs just are worse than WRPGs usually. I'd prefer if everyone made better stuff.

WRPGs aren't RPGs half the time. Dialogue doesn't magically make it an RPG, that makes it an action/adventure game.

>I just realized that there's lots of people here who think that if you dislike JRPGs it's because you're racist or don't like Japan or something
No one thinks this other than you. Anti-weeabooism might be a thing, but it has nothing to do with being racist.

>wasteland 2 metacritic score: 87
>metal max xeno: 61

so this is the power of jrpgs

Xoomers: "Fucking millenials and zoomers don't know what a real RPG is."
Actual boomers: "Nah, they're actually right. You're a pompous ass who should've had the stupid beaten out of you as a child. Nobody cares about your snowflake characters, get back to dungeon crawling."

>Sure, but it always maintained the fundamental system of inputting all the commands for your party, and then those commands being executed depending on speed
So to you a single (cherrypicked obviously) element in a set of mechanics suddenly defines everything about a gameplay model?
Back we go to the usual non arguments, I see.
>Yes, that's that 1% I was talking about
It's far more than that, but whatever suits you if you want to pretend those games outside of DQ have wizardry style combat because they use a round based calculation for turn orders, it's not like you want to discuss anything either way.

Legend of Zelda is an Action-Adventure game. What kind of games are you referring to?

Many years ago I actually made a module for Neverwinter Nights that had branching dialogs based on reaction rolls and reputation because that's precisely what I wanted out of games at the time. More authentic roleplaying.

>WRPGs aren't RPGs half the time. Dialogue doesn't magically make it an RPG
Wouldn't that apply more to jrpgs?

Attached: 12382813821.jpg (738x302, 106K)

>Party management
>Resource management
>Choosing roles for each party member
>Character builds directly affect combat

They're RPGs.

>WRPGs aren't RPGs half the time
And those games get shit on, mostly by WRPG fans. But you aren't allowed to shit on JRPGs.

You know those movies include all plot-relevant gameplay, including boss fights, as well as the life simulator gameplay, which is a major feature of Persona?

It's hard to even call Xeno a MM game, besides the vehicles and a few recurring monsters it's nothing like the previous games, which is precisely why it bombed, it was the same problem they had with the DS Metal Saga.

>otherwise you're claiming that the original roleplaying games aren't actually roleplaying games
How am I claiming that at all, unless you're trying to tell me that the wargames prior to D&D were widely considered RPGs?

>So to you a single (cherrypicked obviously) element in a set of mechanics suddenly defines everything about a gameplay model?
It's not a cherrypicked element, it's the fundamental foundation of the combat system.

>It's far more than that
It might be more than 1%, but the vast majority of turn-based wrpgs still use the wizardry model, so my point still stands.

if by actual boomer you mean mentally ill faggot that missed their chance to fuck everyone over and get rich so they just permanently obsess over snes games to relive their shitty childhood and shit up /vr/, then yes, this is accurate

>Legend of Zelda is an Action-Adventure game. What kind of games are you referring to?
Yes, Zelda is not an RPG either.

If a game has basically nothing beyond dialogue choices and calls itself an RPG, its not an RPG. Witcher, for example, is not an RPG.

JRPGs typically allow you to role-play through combat and gameplay. Many may not be deep RPGs, but they're RPGs, you're choosing roles and they affect how you play the game.

Play a tabletop RPG sometime and see how much of it is just dialogue with no systems to inform it. PROTIP: Next to none of it is.

>no multiplayer
>no collaborative storytelling
They aren't. You're not properly playing out a role then.

The original D&D was primarily a dungeon crawling wargame, bucko.

I guess MM is dead then.

>it's a Yea Forums struggles with language episode
lads, sometimes terms can mean different things in different contexts

>Zelda is not an RPG either
Agreed.
>Witcher for example is not an RPG
It's an action game first but an RPG second. It does have character management (skills, perks and equipment) to go with the rest of an (albeit hidden) character sheet with Geralt's stats and data.

>And those games get shit on
Witcher 3 gets shit on?

Are you fucking high?

They don't get shit on, they're hailed as the best """RPGs""" in years despite not being RPGs. Same shit will happen with Cyberpunk, it won't be an RPG, it'll just be an action/adventure game with dialogue that focuses entirely on its story and presentation, and everyone will lose their shit and call it the best RPG ever made.

>it's the fundamental foundation of the combat system.
No it isn't, it's just a way to calculate turns in battle, an incredibly minor aspect of the general gameplay.

Attached: ME.png (651x154, 37K)

The D&D that first became popularized wasn't. You obviously didn't care for how it became popularized, indicated by how it evolved.

You don't need to playing out a role to be playing an RPG, not to mention that your idea of playing out a role is terribly narrowminded.

>Witcher 3 gets shit on?
Yeah, it gets shit on constantly here.

>You know those movies include all plot-relevant gameplay, including boss fights
Even if they include a few snippets or a few minutes of boss battles here and there, that still leaves 40+ hours of cutscens

>as well as the life simulator gameplay
What 'life simulator' gameplay? The joke that is Persona 5's dialogue system? That gameplay?

Attached: 121020233424.jpg (2000x1884, 919K)

And that is why order must be made, and while it's hard to see it happen from this thread or anywhere else, it will happen one day and these discussions will have been the tiny instrumental parts that make up the final order and definitions.

>You don't need to playing out a role to be playing an RPG
Then the label is meaningless and should be abandoned. RPG literally means "role playing game" and you just told me you don't have to play out a role to play an RPG, so obviously it's 100% a nonsensical label at this point.

Games like Final Fantasy are more like action adventure though. Even normie shit like Fallout and TES you have freedom, quests, skills and stuff that affects the world.

It has a few RPG elements but its not an RPG in the same way that some Zelda games also have a few RPG elements but also aren't RPGs.

I have no roles to choose for Geralt. He's always Geralt, he's always got the same personality, backstory, goals, etc., the skill trees don't change how you play at all, they're just "do fire damage" or "do more potion damage" they don't allow Geralt to take on different roles or playstyles.

no? human language is completely subjective. that being said people know what RPGs are both in terms of pen and paper games, and in terms of computer games.

>here
And hailed as the best RPG in a decade everywhere else.

Not really, MM has been "dead" for an entire generation of consoles, had multiple blunders like the DS Metal Saga and MM4 and it's still alive, the problem with Xeno is that just like the DS game they decided to make a completely different game for apparently no reason, and also do it badly.
As long as the team is active, which it is, it's not dead, it's not in a good position now thanks to Xeno being so horrid though, that is very true, and I say this as somebody who played it on the JP release, one of the biggest blunder I got in recent times.

What most of this boils down to is "it's an RPG if I say it is", aside from WRPG-kun's usual strain of autism.

>Then the label is meaningless and should be abandoned
The label is not meaningless, but it is misleading if you do not know the historical context of the word.
A term made from Pen and Paper RPGs but the part that could effectively be brought into the land of video games was not the role playing, it was the character sheets that every player had and meticulously referenced to the DM and edited to modify their character.

JRPGs allow role-playing through combat systems, character-building and party management/building.

>The label is not meaningless
Then what the hell does it mean if you don't need to play out a role in order to be playing a role playing game?

Press Turn combat is a thousand times better than point and click softcore porn wrpg shit, regardless of genre. Western game combat is always fucking garbage. Fuck off with this fake bullshit.

Wow it's almost like Persona intentionally does something different that other games don't do in order to cater to a specific audience and thus shouldn't really be compared to other games that do not attempt to do the same thing Persona does. Atlus already makes "typical" JRPGs, Persona is not one of them.

What the fuck is "Final Fantasy style combat" out of its 30+ entries?

>Persona is not one of them.
>laughing_Yahweh.gif

>Press Turn combat is a thousand times better than point and click softcore porn wrpg shit, regardless of genre. Western game combat is always fucking garbage. Fuck off with this fake bullshit.

The whole Press Turn/One More Turn system in SMT/Persona is fundamentally flawed. Think about it, you're already being rewarded for targeting the enemy's weakness by making them take more damage, and increasing the chance of landing the relevant status ailment (like freezing an enemy that's weak to ice). The only thing the Press Turn/One More Turn system does is artificially elevate one strategy above all others, by rewarding you even further with free turns/free attacks, making all other strategies inferior by default, even before you add Baton Pass to the formula. It's a complete no-brainer to exploit the enemy's weakness, with no downsides or risks, so why wouldn't you? The result is that it ends up greatly reducing combat depth, and it effectively means the outcome of most battles is decided as soon as they begin. And this is even before considering stuff like Baton Pass, which trivializes the gameplay even further.

I don't know what it says about the people at Atlus that they thought anyone needed such strong incentive to do something as incredibly obvious and straightforward as 'hit the glaring weak spot of the bad guys'.

Attached: 12344889445.jpg (2000x1797, 853K)

>What 'life simulator' gameplay? The joke that is Persona 5's dialogue system? That gameplay?
You know it's really kind of amusing how every time someone brings up something, your response is basically "it's not how I want it, therefore it doesn't count". I mean bless your heart, it's incredibly easy to never lose an argument like this, you may as well pat yourself on the back because ain't no soul in this earth who would be able to convince you of anything other than the reality you have chosen.

>Games like Final Fantasy are more like action adventure though

>Combat is turn-based, not action-combat
>Don't make many dialogue choices

>But yeah totally an action/adventure game even though it literally is neither :^)

Are you fucking retarded?

Name literally one good Japanese game with good combat that isn't hack and slash. Meanwhile I can think of tons of FPS, RTS, RPGs, etc that do a fine job.

>Wow it's almost like Persona intentionally does something different that other games don't do in order to cater to a specific audience and thus shouldn't really be compared to other games that do not attempt to do the same thing Persona does.
So Persona intentionally implements a horribly neutered dialogue system to be different from other games...and this is worthy of praise...why exactly?

Attached: 1549152541649.jpg (1200x1386, 118K)

>It's not an RPG in the same way that Zelda games are not RPGs
It has quite a few more RPG elements than Zelda, which is why it is secondarily and RPG. Likewise it doesn't have nearly as many Advendture elements as Zelda and is therefore not an Action-Adventure.

>I have no roles to choose for Geralt, he is always the same character
Quite wrong. One man's Geralt might be a man of "liberty for subhumans" and feels kinship with them for being shunned by other humans. Another man's Geralt finds himself siding with the humans that his Order is meant to serve.
One man's Geralt hates the Church and its servants, the other man's Geralt tolerates it and what it does for society. You might say that based on the books and what kind of Geralt "feels better" one is canon, but that doesn't change that you can have different Geralts depending on your choices.

>I don't know what it says about the people at Atlus that they thought anyone needed such strong incentive to do something as incredibly obvious and straightforward as 'hit the glaring weak spot of the bad guys'.
Because SMT games are built around the core gameplay mechanics of negotiating with and fusing demons in order to build a team, with massive numbers of demons to ensure you're constantly recycling your team over and over. Therefore, since the enemies are also able to exploit turn press, it forces the player to constantly keep their team balanced while covering their weak spots.

So? At least people shit on it here. Can't say the same for JRPGs here. We constantly have a 500 reply thread of people jerking off FE right now. The JRPG fans here are basically reddit.

I feel like we've had this thread like 50 times already.

Most JRPGs have battle systems designed like board RPGs, except for very recent ones.

I just told you in the very same post.
>character sheets that every player had and meticulously referenced to the DM and edited to modify their character
If a game has character sheets, and if they're a central part of the game's mechanics, then it's an RPG. The term is borrowed from it's Pen and Paper origins, but only part of the practicality is borrowed. Although Pen and Paper games that are exclusively gameplay/dungeon crawling also exist.

>human language is completely subjective
Not quite. I could call you a retard and most people, if not everyone, would know that I'm insulting you rather than offering to sell you my barely used Opel Kadett for only 6k dollars.
> that being said people know what RPGs are both in terms of pen and paper games, and in terms of computer games
There are uncertainties in both cases, and trying to achieve mutual understanding and hearing each others' arguments is exactly the point of threads like this one.

One man's Geralt is still Geralt.

You're really extrapolating and taking some creative liberty with your descriptions of how you can choose different dialogue options that sometimes result in different dialogue being spoken back to you.

Again, what you're describing is an ADVENTURE GAME. Just making different dialogue choices does not make the game an RPG if there are no role-playing systems underneath that inform how those choices are made and affect the results of those choices. When you make those dialogue choices, there are no checks, no abilities or statistics that can affect the outcome, or even your ability to make certain choices. It is functionally and mechanically no different than, again, an ADVENTURE GAME.

FE is an SRPG, not a JRPG.
And a vast cast of characters is not unique to the RPG genre.

>You know it's really kind of amusing how every time someone brings up something, your response is basically "it's not how I want it, therefore it doesn't count".
Okay fine, let's analyze Persona 5's 'life simulator' gameplay then:

>choose an activity from a menu
>your character is magically teleported to the place in question
>npcs talk for 5+ minutes at a time
>your character can choose a response, the only possible outcome of which can be to raise social links or have no effect
>npcs continue to talk for 5+ minutes at a time
>your character can choose a response, the only possible outcome of which can be to raise social links or have no effect
>rinse and repeat a few times
>after the activity ends, you are teleported back
Riveting stuff.

Now let's compare that to the life simulator of say, Planescape: Torment:
>you have to manually travel to your destination
>on the way there the world is freely interactable. you can do side quests, find loot, talk to npcs, pickpocket them (you can also steal from stores). you can also attack and kill npcs, which can alert city guards in the upper districts (but not in the slum sections).
>dialogue always has to be initiated by the player manually. once you do, you can always say farewell and exit the conversation at any time, you're never stuck in a conversation (barring 1 or 2 plot-critical conversations)
>dialogue is fully interactable. when an npc says a line, you always get to choose a response in return
>besides responding to your dialogue choices and actions, npcs can react differently depending on what party members are with you. e.g. interacting with githzerai/githyanki npcs while dak'kon in the party yields compleetely different conversations, having fall-from-grace with you and talking to a baatezu can piss them off to the point that they attack you, etc.

You really can't understand why someone might be disappointed by Persona 5's 'life simulator'? Its just a watered down version of what other RPGs do.

Attached: 1546120063851.jpg (660x574, 31K)

Final Fantasy may refer to the whole series or the specific game by the same name. If referring to the series does not make sense then he's probably referring to the game.

So why isn't the label CSG, character sheet game?

Shut the fuck up and stop arguing.
We need to invent the PRPG.
Platforming Role Playing Game.

Attached: 1565414702033.jpg (512x384, 82K)

>You're really extrapolating and taking some creative liberty with your descriptions of how you can choose different dialogue options that sometimes result in different dialogue being spoken back to you
I'm talking about actual branching paths and character attitudes changing. Geralt making different friends and allies depending on your choices. But yes, also the little things that builds character which is what I was going for.

>different dialogue choices does not make the game an RPG
Correct, character sheets do. And Witcher games are little odd when it comes to those. They are obviously there, you have equipment management, perks and skill selection when leveling up. The whole summarizing sheet is hidden from the player though, which reinforces the action gameplay that the game has, and deludes some people thinking it's an action game rather than an Action-RPG, which it is.
>Adventure game
The Witcher is not an adventure game. While there is some exploring involved and there are some poorly crafted dungeons with little to no puzzles, these things are not in focus. They are tertiary at best.

>and this is worthy of praise...why exactly
Because it is unique and gives sales.

>if role playing makes a role playing game then everything is a rpg
Role playing means playing with the role itself. You aren't doing that in a game like The Legend of Zelda. You are given a role, but you aren't playing with the role; you're playing with other mechanics.

Friendly reminder that action RPGs were invented in Japan (Hydlide, Dragon Slayer, Courageous Perseus) and predate Japanese turn-based RPGs.
Japanese turn-based RPGs are inspired by Western RPGs like Ultima and Wizardry.
Elder Scrolls is a JRPG
Final Fantasy is a WRPG.

>b-but muh Temple of Apshai came first
Fast-paced turnbased combat on a timer. Not actually action-based.
>b-but muh Gateway to Apshai came first
Actually action-based, but it's an action-adventure game, not an RPG. Very minimal RPG elements compared to its predecessor. It would be liking calling Zelda an RPG.

You cannot refute this.

Attached: smug asuka.png (537x538, 693K)

Again though, this is what you do every time someone brings up a point. Whether it's summoning, dialogue, thieves whatever, it's irrelevant. You claim something does not exist. Other prove it does. You claim it doesn't matter, because it's worse than what some other game does. Therefore, as always, it boils down to "I don't like it, so it's irrelevant".

How do you expect anyone to entertain you when this is the end result? You're more static than the fucking JRPGs you constantly rail against my dude.

all my idea

Because the term RPG is what was used for the pen and paper games that were used as inspiration.

>Captcha is fucking with me so I can't post from my usual browser

What's the name?

based

There was some phone game that did this when smart phones were still in their infancy.
Can't believe a fucking phone game got to this first.

>You cannot refute this.
ARPGs are just DnD themed generic action games. Refuted.

They're called Japanese Adventure Games (JAGs) idiot.

So why are the other two general styles still represented today, but the first one is something exclusive to pretty much just older FF games and their clones? Doesn't make sense.

But the pen and paper games used character sheets, no? So why weren't they called CSGs?

That's visual novels.

>Elder Scrolls is a JRPG
Elder Scrolls was inspired by Ultima Underworld, which was the first 3D-action RPG ever made. Additionally, the first 2D-Action RPG, Gateway to Apshai, was also made in the west.

>Actually action-based, but it's an action-adventure game, not an RPG.

>I toyed with dismissing the game as an RPG entirely, but it technically meets my three categories. Although the combat is solely action-based, damage does draw from the underlying strength, agility, and luck statistics. These statistics are improvable throughout the game; if you time out a level (rather than manually moving to the next one), the game will give you an attribute bump if you amassed enough points while you were there. You can also find special equipment like "strength stones" and "agility amulets" to give an attribute boost.

>My third core RPG category is equipment, and Gateway does a reasonable job here for a game of such limited aspirations. You start with a dagger and leather armor, but you can find weapon and armor upgrades, shields, helms, amulets, gauntlets, spells, potions, salves, magic maps, and other items throughout your explorations, using them whenever you think it's best. Many of the items are trapped, doing damage, freezing you, or teleporting you to another part of the level when you pick them up.

Attached: 1557065162769.jpg (431x420, 40K)

Series creators wanted to branch out, which has worked wonderfully for them.
I'm not sure I'm understanding your post properly, but I'm guessing you're asking why modern Final Fantasy games are different from older ones, when games like Dragon Quest has managed to remain true to its roots.

>b-but muh Gateway to Apshai came first
That wasn't the first action-RPG. That would be Dungeons of Daggorath, from 1982.

Attached: 13761383012.jpg (540x540, 26K)

>So why weren't they called CSGs
Good question. Might be because they, product wise, are more books than character sheets. And if you called them character sheet games then people might think they don't to need buy the books (the product you're trying to sell).

I refuse to believe that doesnt already exist to some extent.

Attached: 1549140186715.png (395x387, 47K)

Super Paper Mario.

the first arpg was my penis in your tight pasty weeb butt

>Dumb NIGGERS still think that the term RPG comes from Dragon Quest or some shit and not Dungeons and Dragons
>Dumber NIGGERS still don't realize that the classification of JRPG was meant to seperate Dungeons and Dragons style gameplay from number grinders in the first place
Niggers.

I recall Tomb Raider: Angel of Darkness wanted to do that, but it was as half-baked as the rest of the game.

This is an extremely fucking stupid argument and you're a massive dumbass.

naturally it exists
store.steampowered.com/app/203510/Fortune_Summoners/

So why weren't they called Character Book Games then?

>What is Faxanadu

Attached: Faxanadu_NES_US_box.jpg (213x300, 24K)

>The Witcher is not an adventure game
The Witcher is not a role-playing game

That's literally what all the SotN style Castlevanias are

>Ultima Underworld, which was the first 3D-action RPG ever made
False. Japan has beat you to it. Wibarm (1989)

>>I toyed with dismissing the game as an RPG entirely, but it technically meets my three categories. Although the combat is solely action-based, damage does draw from the underlying strength, agility, and luck statistics. These statistics are improvable throughout the game; if you time out a level (rather than manually moving to the next one), the game will give you an attribute bump if you amassed enough points while you were there. You can also find special equipment like "strength stones" and "agility amulets" to give an attribute boost.
>>My third core RPG category is equipment, and Gateway does a reasonable job here for a game of such limited aspirations. You start with a dagger and leather armor, but you can find weapon and armor upgrades, shields, helms, amulets, gauntlets, spells, potions, salves, magic maps, and other items throughout your explorations, using them whenever you think it's best. Many of the items are trapped, doing damage, freezing you, or teleporting you to another part of the level when you pick them up.
Instead of quoting some random guy online who has no authority over this, tell me your opinion.
Also, all of these can easily be applied to 2D Zelda games, but nobody argues that 2D Zelda is an RPG. In fact, people argue that it isn't an RPG.

The Witcher is not a game

Based on the fact that DRPGs and SRPGs are broadly represented to this day, I assumed the question was to be of some relevance, while "Final Fantasy style combat" either had to mean the usual turn-based or action, or something very specific and outdated. And if it's the former, you can't really use an example for it.

The character-building in Witcher is anemic at best and completely irrelevant at worst. The way you build Geralt doesn't affect much of anything, you're still playing largely the same way during hour 5 as you will through hour 100.

The Witcher is an action/adventure game, not an RPG, because there is little/no role-playing present in the game.

>False. Japan has beat you to it. Wibarm (1989)
"""3D"""

Attached: hqdefault.jpg (480x360, 43K)

Some have them. Fucking Final Fantasy 7 has multiple-choice dialog.
Also all of you are fucking idiots and I hate you for simultaneously taking an overly-literal approach to the term "roleplaying" while not even understanding what the fuck the word means and how it applies to gaming. The roleplaying in RPG comes from the fact that you fill in the blanks of a decision-based and diceroll-based narrative using your imagination and dialog with other players; and individual characters level up and progress from adventure to adventure rather than being throwaway units that exist as part of an army as in a wargame.

JRPGs are "Light RPGs." They streamline many of the more complex and often tedious elements of RPGs like having to create a character before you know anything about how the game's mechanics work and making stupid dialog choices to get different reactions for characters as coded by autistic game developers who don't understand human psychology anyway even if it were possible to program any kind of reasonable AI conversation. They are often easy, designed for young kids not older neckbeards. They often have a very low threshold for failure and mistakes often cost nothing more than a little more time grinding for potions or whatever.

But they are still RPGs and if you don't understand this you are an absolute fucking moron.

Yes it is

I just think its a boring game that cared far too much about its story and presentation rather than its systems and gameplay.

>You cannot refute this.
Yeah, I can. In fact it's pretty easy. There has been traditional RPG's that have involved action before video games even existed. Even in the mainstream reenacting and LARPing has been known a thing for quite a long time. In the video game world, most games action, and RPG's aren't an acceptation. I think it's fair to say that Ultima I, besides being a blueprint for most games, had a proto action RPG element. I don't think it's hard at all to make that leap. The fact you're saying that games like Hydlide, Dragon Slayer and Courageous Perseus predate turn-based JRPGs (I'm not entirely sure if this is correct) is redundant because we can all clearly see that these titles are very much taken from the Western RPG tradition. These are titles about knights and dragons in a Western setting. All RPGs are of a Western source originally, and honestly I can't even tell what point you're trying to make otherwise.

>False. Japan has beat you to it. Wibarm (1989)
Is that actual 3D or fake 3D like Dungeon Master? Because it looks like the latter.

Can you actually jump and fly in 3D space like you can in Ultima Underworld?

>Some have them. Fucking Final Fantasy 7 has multiple-choice dialog.
Yeah, it does. A handful of those, in a 50 hour game. Whoop di doo. When people say 'dialogue choices', they mean a dialogue system that lets you talk with every npc.

lol
youtube.com/watch?v=fA9YByLdJZw

What the fuck how is this 3D. You may as well be saying that Akalabeth is 3D.

No, Zelda 2 actualy is an RPG though,
You are right that all the other 2D Zelda's aren't.

But in Zelda 2, Link's ability to preform actions can be raised by repeatedly performing those actions.
Going out and beating up 20 moblins makes Link, the character, better at beating up moblins.
In other Zelda games, if you go out and beat up 20 moblins, you the player might get better at it, but Link does not improve, so those aren't RPGs because they lack that character building aspect.

>1986
That's actually really impressive regardless if it's the first or not.

Once again, good question. Ask the guy who made the term, it's quite possible he's still alive.

>DRPG
Run this one by me, will you? What's a DRPG to you.

It's retarded in FF7 and it's retarded in all those WRPGs also. Honestly if there's one thing I would kill from WRPGs it would be the god damn multiple choice dialog. Dialog trees are the stupidest invention ever and don't come anywhere close to ever simulating anything remotely like real roleplaying. I hate them and I hate people who like them and don't realize how fucking lame they are.

WRPGs are often full of great complexity and deep gameplay systems and yet because everyone needs this stupid superficial fake roleplaying feel they need these tedious dialog systems bolted on top for retards to pretend like they're acting out some realistic interaction with NPCs.

>Virtual predetermined consequences
Maybe you autists should focus on real life if you want consequences that matter

Dialogue choices are great if you don't like the weird silent protagonist, and the character is not - or only partially - a predetermined character.

>lumping press turn and one more together
they're fundamentally different. press turn affects the entire party, while one more affects each character seperately.
not gonna dwell long on comparing both but one more is fucking shit while press turn is a well balanced system where the stats of each party member count.
that aside you also ignore the fact that weakness abusal drops off hard (and is pretty much nonexistent against bosses) by the time you hit midgame, especially in press turn.
what makes this system truly great though is that it enforces stat buffs and elemental affinities and makes multi hit spells not always better than single target ones.
due to all of that the depth comes lies less in fights and rather in fusing and building a balanced team to carry you through dungeons and boss fights

That's the funny thing about it. Modern MMOs might have amusement park playstyles nowadays, but they still have more 'roleplay' within them than most JRPGs.

>Some have them. Fucking Final Fantasy 7 has multiple-choice dialog.
So does RE7, once in the middle of the game. No one considers it to have dialogue decisions because of that.

>Friendly reminder that action RPGs were invented in Japan (Hydlide, Dragon Slayer, Courageous Perseus) and predate Japanese turn-based RPGs.
Semantic fuckery from a time when RPG was a label slapped on anything with a fantasy theme. Top-down arcade style action games in the vein of Tower of Druaga are barely worth considering RPGs.
ARPG is an RPG with the turn-based combat swapped out for an action system while keeping everything else as intact as possible.

Square tile based dungeon exploration as its core element, with the entire party usually being compressed into a first-person camera.
There's more to it, but that sums it up.

Ultima.

Attached: pc-gamer-feelies.jpg (1599x857, 502K)

Sounds like a dungeon crawling JRPG.
We are talking the likes of Etrian Odyssey, right?

People consider WRPGs to have dialog decisions even if most of them are meaningless and stupid, just because there are a lot of them and retards are easily tricked into thinking multiple choice dialog counts as roleplaying.

"DRPG with Wizardry style combat"
Basically, yes?

>with the entire party usually being compressed into a first-person camera
The term for this is blobber.

Dialogue choices do not a WRPG make, but they are often found in WRPGs and CRPGs, that's for sure.

>Wizardry style combat
People refer to this a lot in this thread, but I haven't played it. It's not a JRPG if it does not have distinct in-combat and out-of-combat parts. Is this the case in your DRPGs?

>The term for this is blobber
Never heard that used before.

At this point I have to drop the pretense and just come out and say what I've been implying all this time, which I assume you picked up on as well, but who knows. The reason why no one was using such labels like "CSG" back then is because they were not retroactively attempting to figure out what it was they were doing like you are doing now. You come to the conclusion that the character sheets are the defining aspects of all these games because you can't see how else you can place them all under a single label. The RPG label was used because, at the time of its creation, the pioneering individuals who were at the forefront of this new genre were focused on what it is they really desired—which was the ability to act out a living, breathing role (that means with a group of human beings in a room together) in a meaningful sense (that means with a DM who will respond to their decisions and adapt and change the story in order to support them). The character sheets and mechanics and everything else was there simply to facilitate the opportunities to fulfill this desire; ultimately they were inconsequential to the games and were simply a "necessary evil" because of the nature of pen-and-paper, hence why they called them RPGs and not CSGs. What this means is that many of the games you're now attempting to reconcile in with the RPG label aren't RPGs at all, because they don't do anything to fulfill this desire anymore, and it's precisely because you're attempting to fit them into the label that you're elevating the inconsequential aspect of the games (the character sheets) to the level of utmost importance, because it's the only shared aspect of all these games (only shared because it's the shallowest and most inconsequential aspect of them).

Final Fantasy is not an RPG and tons of other video games labeled RPGs are not RPGs at all. This is the truth. The character sheets are inconsequential to the definition of an RPG. You don't even really need them!

Attached: Gum.png (540x540, 133K)

nice nonargument

You are wrong. True definitions are made when looking back at [thing] and looking at what defines it. Temporary definitions are made when [thing] is invented and a term for it is needed. Sometimes the invented term sticks around, other times a completely different term becomes the new definition and sometime the original term sticks around but its meaning gets twisted as [thing] develops over the years.

People consider WRPGs to have dialog decisions even if most of them are meaningless and stupid because they're still made on the soil from which true RPGs were born. They are still wrong about all WRPGs being true RPGs but pretty much all WRPGs are closer to true RPGs than pretty much all JRPGs, except maybe for more recent WRPGs that are more influenced by JRPGs than tabletop RPGs or CRPGs.

>only shared because it's the shallowest and most inconsequential aspect of them
You mean the most important and necessary part of them? The part that most of the mechanics rely upon, aside from dice rolls.

why do weebs hate Western games? Why can't they show some respect for the titles and styles that created their favorite games? It's a little sad. These people are one step away from hating all Western fantasy because it goes against the idea that Japan doesn't like or use foreign sources. Really evaluate what you're doing with your life, it's sad to hate for no reason.

Dude, no one gave a shit about the character sheets when playing D&D. They still don't. You're talking out of your ass and it shows. Just give it up already.

You sound like you use both the term WRPG and JRPG wrong.

why do westaboos simultaneously hate japanese games and try to take all the credit for them?

What are you talking about? No one cares about their character's stats, skills, abilities and equipment? Are you nuts?

WRPG=RPG made in the West
JRPG=RPG made in Japan
CRPG=Computer RPG, which I used there loosely to refer specifically to older WRPGs in contrast with WRPGs in general.

And ONLY YOU the chosen scholar, who has honed his knowledge for years within the magma of role-playing, is capable of bringing this truth to the ignorant and foolish masses. Blessed be thy name, user.

All wrong terms. Nice job.

Star Cruiser (1988) came before Wibarm.
youtube.com/watch?v=zb-hqdaDCW8

What I mean is that that's not the main focus of their enjoyment. No one plays D&D for the fucking character sheets.

Well don't just spew low insults pointlessly, enlighten me with the correct terms.

There was an error, Wibarm came out in 1986. see

t. has never played with wargamers/powergamers
They are very real, and they are also the kind of people who'd benefit the most from the greater mathematical possibilities that you could implement by making games on a computer instead.

>respect
Most JRPG fans these days don't give a flying about 80s JRPGs either - the genre-defining games and they even outright hate them, calling them grindy and outdated. Why would you expect them to go further than that?

>JRPG
>All about systems and mechanics, character-building, party management, resource management, etc.

>WRPG
>Anemic skill tree, real-time combat that amounts of mashing 1 attack button, next to no variation in how you can build your character, let alone multiple characters to choose roles for and manage

Really just sounds like you think dialogue is what makes a game an RPG when in reality it makes it an adventure game because 95% of the time its missing those systems underneath that actually provide the player with agency regarding how the character is built and as a result how every conversation can play out. The ability to make dialogue choices without the systems to inform those choices does not make a game an RPG because those systems are what allow the player to role-play, not the act of reading some dialogue.

>CRPG=Computer RPG, which I used there loosely to refer specifically to older WRPGs in contrast with WRPGs in general.
CRPG was used to distinguish computer RPGs from tabletop RPGs when the first computer RPGs began being made. It was never supposed to refer to some sort of subgenre of RPGs

Inspired by Wizardry and D&D.

JRPGs are basically interactive stories with good music.

My bad. Same company anyway.

>t. has never played with wargamers/powergamers
Oh, I have. They're as clueless about RPGs as you are.

>JRPG
>All about systems and mechanics, character-building, party management, resource management, etc.

>WRPG
>next to no variation in how you can build your character, let alone multiple characters to choose roles for and manage

Attached: rpg mechanics.jpg (1988x2500, 1.38M)

>CRPG was used to distinguish computer RPGs from tabletop RPGs when the first computer RPGs began being made.
Right, which is why I loosely used CRPG to refer to old WRPGs. Tabletop RPGs aren't as prominent anymore so a younger person would automatically think CRPG means "an old WRPG" or at least that was the logic behind my statement.

See & >has no argument, passive aggressive bleating instead

WRPG, Western-style RPG. A development of the old Wizardry and Might and Magic games. Today commonly associated with Dragon Age and is similar to the gameplay found in MMORPGs. There was a rather extensive discussion about it in this thread from around 21:30 to around 22:00 CET.

JRPG, Japanese-style RPG, is commonly associated with the classics Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest. Has menu based combat and distinctive in-combat and out-of-combat surroundings.

CRPG, Classic-style RPG. Almost exclusively released on PC these games' golden era is far past. Often features as top-down view and tries to be as much like a pen and paper RPG as it can, at least compared to other types. Common examples include Baldur's Gate, Pillars of Eternity and ARCANUM.

You are a JRPG concept trying to escape your confines and I'm sorry for you.

This shit is just semantics at this point.

>They're as clueless about RPGs as you are
And they'd say the same to you. Fact of the matter is that when they play some D&D they do it just as much as when you do it. There are many different ways to play, and that is even more apparent in the video game scene where there exists WRPGs, CRPGs, ARPGs, JRPGs and SRPGs just to name some of them. All RPGs.

No shit, that's what the entire thread is about.

Any good WRPGs on the Gamecube or Wii?

Attached: 1519394616131.jpg (401x274, 31K)

too bad all those thief gimmicks don't make wrpgs any less boring to actually play. and wrpg summoners don't do anything special that megami tensei protagonists, pokemon trainers, certain digimon tamers, certain dragon quest heroes, etc. don't also do. nice cherrypicking, though.

>Any good WRPGs
no.

Xenoblade Chronicles ;)
I actually mean that unironically.

>And they'd say the same to you.
Why the fuck should I care? They don't understand RPGs at all. They come from an entirely different genre of game and then just apply their rigid views onto it without ever actually grappling with what makes it unique. Playing with them, tabletop sessions slowly just turn into wargaming sessions. At least I can play a wargame without turning it into an RPG, but they're obviously too retarded to be able to play different kinds of games. None of this is a proper argument by the way.

>Why the fuck should I care? They don't understand RPGs at all
Of course, only you understand. Your way of doing things is the only right way of doing things. Everyone else is wrong.

Baroque
(according to the thread it's a WRPG)

Then every game that has a protagonist is an RPG

>too bad all those thief gimmicks don't make wrpgs any less boring to actually play
As opposed to the riveting thief gameplay of jrpgs where you draw out a trivially easy battle for minutes because you want to steal an item from an enemy, but your thief keeps failing to?

At least being a thief in a wrpg opens up different playstyles, like stealth and setting traps. You know, the whole idea behind a ROLE-PLAYING game.

>and wrpg summoners don't do anything special
They do something that virtually no jrpg does: let you summon an army of creatures that you can command, as well as summoning magical items and equipment.

>that megami tensei protagonists, pokemon trainers, certain digimon tamers, certain dragon quest heroes, etc.
None of those games have actual summoning. Pokemon and demons in megami tensei function like party members, not summons

>nice cherrypicking, though.
Cherrypicking of what, exactly? Square was the biggest RPG developer in the world at the time, with dozens of RPGs under their belt and 100+ million dollar budgets, while Bioware had never made an RPG before Baldur's Gate. If anything, the comparison is unfair towards wrpgs.

Attached: 1553805098884.png (808x740, 1.09M)

From a quick glance it looks more like an Action RPG to me, except there's very little action and mostly just running around in dungeons.
Not the guy you're replying to by the way.

>Of course, only you understand.
The only one on this board, in this thread, at this moment, who does apparently.

Face it, nigger. Dungeon crawling and powergaming is also RPGs. While it may once have been something else, what currently defines RPGs is a way of playing and keeping track of your character.