I used to enjoy JRPG's a lot back when I was in my teens. Campy stories and the traditional silent protagonist hero saving the world with a band of misfits/etc...

Now, I've recently tried playing Lunar Silver Star Story again... and I couldn't get into it at all. Same goes for more recent JRPG's, they just can't get me into them anymore. I think as I've grown older, my tastes have changed, preferring WRPG's instead.

Games I used to love, Lunar, FFIV onwards etc, I can't play... while games like Quest for Glory, the old AD&D PC games and recent games like Mass Effect etc I can play easily and still enjoy. For me, getting older has changed my tastes in games.

Can't say I've changed much. The RPG's are the ones that are changing. I enjoy older JRPG's a lot more. But I couldn't get into FFXIII much or any other recent JRPG for that matter. People say that WRPG's is where it's at now, and I'd say that's about right. I really liked games like Mass Effect and Fallout 3.

Man, that's a good question; for me, I'd say it has to some degree, even though my only RPGs have obviously been the FF series. I think my taste in RPGs varies depending on the game I'm playing. I most definitely can't get into the original NES FF games, or any other NES RPGs for that matter. Reworked on GBA, they are perfect. But at the end of the day, no matter how deep into FFXII or FFX I may get, I can still sink my teeth into FFI or II on GBA and still taste the sensation of nostalgia that first beset me on my initial playthrough. So I'd say I have very selective RPG tastes; new or old, if I loved it once, I'll love it forever.

to some extent.
i cant stand the new JRPGS (there are exceptions, but counted), and my interest in Wrpgs has grown, specially since playing morrowind back in... 200something.
i will still play older JRPGS from the ps2 downwards, specially JRPGS from the psx, like thousand arms.

I don't feel I have changed.

The quality of the Final Fantasy series has seriously declined with the last 2 games.
If you believe the rumors, initially reported on Neoseeker, that management at Square has told it game designers not to focus on the game's story.If true, that heralds a serious decline in the games they are making.

I've always liked western rpgs.I was a big fan of Baldur's Gate 2 and the Black Isle Company and I am happy with the recent success of Mass Effect 2, Fallout 3, and other western games. I hope we see more of those..

I also hope Square takes note and makes the necessary changes to save the Final Fantasy series.

I'm getting pretty jaded with both, at the moment.

JRPGs are stuck in a bit of a rut, and need a really great game to come out and re-energise the brand.

WRPGs meanwhile are ailing from a lack of variety. Bioware make practically all of them, and their games have always adhered to a very samey formula.

Again, it's nothing a really great installment couldn't fix, but right now, it's slim pickings from either genre, IMO.

I mean, I'm playing Nier at the moment, for crying out loud. It's the most most boring RPG I've ever played, but there's nothing else out!

I understand what you mean about being jaded with both Vyrkolas, I've felt that way myself but find more enjoyment with WRPG's now. I was given three JRPG's not long ago, and I'm honestly trying to get into them... but it's just not working.

WRPG's like Mass Effect, Dragon Age, Oblivion etc... are good games, but I find myself reflecting more on older WRPG's. Sierra's Quest for Glory series is one particular series I can enjoy at any time. Same goes for SSI's (Strategic Simulations Incorporated) games, like Champions Of Krynn, Death Knights of Krynn, Dark Queen of Krynn, Treasures of the Savage Frontier, Pool of Radiance etc.

I hope that one of these JRPG's I was given can grab hold of my attention... though, I doubt it...

Bioware makes kick-ass looking games, none of which I've played though. I do want to get all the ones you've mentioned, DH, as they've got my curiosity piqued. But I agree JRPGs are getting a little more lopsided; seriously, The World Ends With You is probably the most up-to-date RPG I've got in my library, and holy crap NO. NO! That game . . . no. Just no.

Ah, Quest for Glory - now we're talking! QFG4: Shadows of Darkness is one of my all time favourite games, ever.

I just loved the Call of Cthulu, Dracula, Edgar Allen Poe atmosphere, mixed in with truly hilarious humour. The QFG series were all pretty good, mind. In fact, I liked just about everything that Sierra brought out around that time.

And come on, no place for Curse of the Azure Bonds? It was way better than Pool of Radiance!


As for JRPGs... well, I think you're right not to get your hopes up.

In my opinion, Namco are the only company worth giving a go at the moment. Tales of Vesperia and Eternal Sonata are the only 'serious' JRPGs I'd recommend from this generation.

Some of the Nippon Ichi games are okay too, but they're very much an acquired taste. Its always a bit of a gamble with them, whether you're going to get a brilliant game or a truly incomprehensible one.

QFGIII: Wages of War was my first QFG game I played. After that, had to get the rest lol. QFGIV: Shadows of Darkness is one of my favorites as well, and you are correct about the atmosphere of the game, the humor aspects reminded me in some parts of Monty Python.

I forgot about Curse of the Azure Bonds lol. I had the SSI 9 game CD-Rom, and could only remember 5 of the games on it (Mainly the Krynn games, as I'm a fan of the Dragonlance Universe.). I enjoyed the Savage Frontier games a lot as well.

I've played a bit of Eternal Sonata... and couldn't get into it at all. Haven't tried Tales of Vesperia yet, however I'm not a fan of the Tales series of games. I was given Star Ocean: The Last Hope, The Last Remnant and Infinite Undiscovery, games I have played and:

Star Ocean - Didn't like it at all. I did enjoy the third installment (Til the End of Time) though.

The Last Remnant - The battle system annoyed me to no end, the story was pretty mediocre...

Infinite Undiscovery - Just bad game design imo.

As they cost me nothing, and I don't have anything else to play atm (until Fable III and Assassin's Creed Brotherhood comes out), I'm gonna play one of them... see if a second playthrough can change my first opinion of them. However... if that didn't work for me with FFXIII.. I doubt it'll work this time.

You should stick with Eternal Sonata - it turns into a fine little game, IMO.

I disagree about Star Ocean TLH (well, sort of anyway), but we've covered that before. It's certainly nowhere near as good as Til the end of Time though, I agree. And the game is definately no world beater, anyway.

The Last Remnant and Lost Odyssesy are utterly, utterly awful games. The only thing I quite enjoyed about Last Remnant was the fact that the characters seem to like punching straight through people as a means of execution!


But yeah, Shadows of Darkness, man... They just don't make em like they used to. Even the manuals were hilarious back then. 'Bigger bun Building' by Carl Atlas. 'Confessions of a Master Thief' by Matt 'The Cat' Mcmasters...

Those were the days...

My tastes haven't changed or shifted, my standpoint on RPG's is pretty much the same as Vrykolas.

I'm kinda researching games, but JRPG games start to fall on the PS2, I'm kinda researching the genre from that point & seriously 90% of the games I'm interested are Tactical RPG.
I'm currently investigating the MegaTen games.

I've never been into WRPG's I've only played the KOTOR games, Jade Empire, Diablo, Morrowind & Fallout, and I've only got hooked by Diablo & KOTOR.
Diablo has a brilliant storyline & a brilliant gameplay, but to enjoy it requires you to be REALLY interested on the storyline without letting yourself being distracted by it's addictive gameplay.
Planescape: Torment was another title that I was surprised to see, but I can't play it, I've just don't like the Baldur's Gate engine.

Of course if I want to revive a great RPG experience I take Parasite Eve, Chrono Trigger, FFT or Vagrant Story.

BTW ANGRYWOLF, I would drop the hopes on Square, seriously, that Company only cares about money since Kingdom Hearts.

To be fair, companies need money to continue!

I think Square's (rather ham fisted) attempts to appeal to Western audiences recently, simply echo many other Jap companies who are worried that people are no longer 'buying Oriental'.

But then again, Nippon Ichi's slavishly Japanese culture products, are simply too bizarre for most western gamers to connect with.

I think the problem lies more in the fact that Square have lost most of their 'cult' status to Bioware. They are considered 'has-beens' and that label is very hard to shake off.

Bioware get an easy ride from the critics and public because of this, whereas Square get criticised for things that people would have let slide just a few years ago.

And to be blunt, that's just the way it goes. No company deserves to succeed because of some divine right. If Square want their spotlight back, they'll have to produce the goods, simple as that.

Square need to make something truly sensational, if they want to get back on the map. Not 'fairly good' or 'pretty decent if you give it a chance'...

They can take some heart from the fact that the RPG landscape on this Gen of consoles, still lacks a true masterpiece, a true defining moment.

Look under Mass Effect 2's shiny hood, and it was just the same old, same old KOTOR formula from Bioware, with a glossy shoot em up makeup job. Sub Gears of War gameplay with an utterly standard 'save the galaxy from the bad aliens' story.

Anyone who's been around for a while in gaming knows that feeling when you see the real deal. And in my opinion, we have not seen it yet in this Gen. Even the best RPGs have been to a large extent, treading water instead of treading new ground.

I'm way more into strategy rpgs then I used to be, and I guess I'm a little more into weird stuff? I've always loved games like Harvest Moon that had dating sim components, but I don't know if I would've been psyched about stuff like Super Dimension Game Neptune like I am now.

I agree with Vrykolas' point about Square being criticized for stuff fans would've gladly excused a few years ago. This is only happening in the west, though- people still went nuts over Final Fantasy XIII in Japan.

Nippon Ichi has always made niche titles, and their games are budgeted to reflect that. I'm sure they'd love to have a big hit, but they're not aiming for as big as audience as Square and Bioware's games are.

for the most part with the course that the recent FF games have taken.Maybe Square can keep the game going and have robust sales in Japan but they will start to slip in the west if they don't make changes.

Sad that people on the various forums have already abandoned FFXIII and now want to talk about Versus and other games coming out.

IMO, Square has lost a lot of reputation with some recent games they've released over the last few years. From my experience, I've spoken with many clerks/managers of gaming stores over the years, and what they've told me.

FFX initially sold very well, but many gaming store had many copies returned or traded in not long after it's release. FFX-2 had only mediocre success and some stores had to mark them down by large amounts to try and sell them.

FFXI Online (only on PC and Xbox 360 here in AUS) have sold reasonably, but still not as big as the PlayStation FF's.

FFXII had a lot of hype, did sell moderately better than FFX-FFXIO, but one store I went to, I was told had a dozen copies returned to them two weeks after release.

FFXIII, same with FFXII, had great initial sales. However, from 3 stores in the same shopping complex, returns of FFXIII were almost the same amount of sales within a week of release. Prices for the Limited Collector's Edition have plummeted drastically (I ended up buying a second copy, brand new and sealed, for 10$AUSD) from a month of it's release.

The reason I brought them up, is that it's kind of obvious that unless SE does something to rectify the situation, the FF series could fall back into obscurity.

That's just with FF titles, but other SE published/developed games, have suffered similarly. The Last Remnant, Star Ocean The Last Hope and Infinite Undiscovery haven't done much to correct SE's descent. When I get my console back, I'll give them a honest try, but as this will be the second time I'm trying I doubt it.

The gameplay mechanics need to be fixed imo. Infinite Undiscovery for example, when you pull up the game menu, some would think the 'action' would pause allowing you to answer the phone/go to the bathroom/etc. Unfortunately for this game, it doesn't. When you come back, you'll find your party ko'd and the game over screen waiting for you.

The stories for the above games, while standard for RPG's, does require SE to learn from to provide better games. I would think that most RPG fans have grown to want better stories, or ones which have that something extra. Not rehashing of older games.

Regarding BioWare/Square-Enix... I can only speak for myself here, but I personally feel that BioWare games are for more mature gamers, as I do thoroughly enjoy the games they've made (as I'm sure Vyrkolas knows, that I'm a fan of Mass Effect 2), and I find myself actually waiting in anticipation for more games they make. Square-Enix, which I admit I did consider myself a fan of, with recent games (Namely the ones mentioned at the beginning of this post, with the exception of FFXI Online) have lost a lot of ground with me and I would not recommend any of the recent games to anyone.

But that's just me (also until I replay Infinite Undiscovery, Star Ocean The Last Hope and The Last Remnant so the jury's still out on those three.).

Bioware appeal to a different set of values than Square - it does not make them more mature.

Like White Wolf Games before them, they offer wish fulfilment and empowerment to gamers, and constantly flirt with the trashy, the chance to be able to do whatever you like, putting in sex and graphic violence etc, because they know these things sell games.

You always get the official seal of approval from some secret brotherhood, to be the biggest jerk ever (their screening processes apparantly never picking up the brutal deeds you inflict on everyone who comes near you).

Their worlds are the defintion of cult, inhabited by quirky, comic characters and camp villains etc, which you can happily stroll about in, being the best and most powerful person ever, in.

Bioware should be very careful indeed, though. The mass public and critical acclaim won't last - it never does. And when the bubble bursts, they could find themselves where SE are now.

Niggles will not be looked over, they'll be obssessed over. The critics will really go to town on Bioware's derivative main stories, rather than let them off with a gentle scolding (even the most glowing reviews of ME2 had little praise for the main story).


As for JRPGs, I would argue that the stories in Square's games have not diminished. The basic ideas are still very good, the way in which they are told however, isn't.

Valkerie Profile, Star Ocean: TLH, Nier, The Last Remnant, Final Fantasy 12 and 13, all have interesting story elements that develop as the game progresses.

The problem is that the games themselves are frequently not paced or constructed well enough, and/or don't have characters that appeal to western gamers anymore.

The Last Remnant in particular is an absolute shambles of a game. Which is a shame, because the story becomes quite engaging, later on.

SE might be able to learn some tricks from Bioware however with regard to the pace at which they make and publish games.

SE release dozens of new games every year, across various console and portable formats. Bioware meanwhile, release about 1 or 2.

But when a great many of those games are of such dubious quality as Nier and Last Remnant, perhaps a focus on quality over quantity, would be a good idea?

Well they have plenty of teams within Square Enix, so it only makes sense for them to bring out a lot of games. Besides Square is also a publisher. A lot of games aren't developed by their studios. BioWare on the other hand just has the one.

I can't stand most Mainstream JRPGs since the release of Final Fantasy XI and beyond that. I tried to get into Lost Oddessy and hated it. for the most part I can't stand the direction Square Enix is going in. However, I still enjoy games like Dragon Quest 8, which they did right and is the first of its kind that fills you up and gives you so much extra of classic game play gone modern. Too bad they can't make more games like this one.

Disgaea 1 and 2 which for me have made me really love that style of RPG. Since I loved Final Fantasy Tactics, the Advance Series has really irked me, anything and everything they added excluding the races and the fact it was portable made me sad and disheartening of the entire series altogether.

Recently playing Tales of Vesperia I fell in love with it, It's a fantastic game and made me wish I played the Earlier Tales games.

Half Minute Hero is addicting. Very Addicting...soo Addicting..

I've also been weaning into more WRPGs as well as many other users have posted. Fallout 3, Dragon Age Origins, and even the older ones like Diablo and Buldurs Gate, awesome. Best of all I can still go back to all these games with joy and glee, enjoying and loving every last minute.

So no good sirs, I do not believe your tastes have changed, Square Enix has just been sucking hardcore in the recent years.

Yes, but is having lots of teams really working out for them? It still divides money and manpower to different projects, to the detriment of all. Bioware meanwhile are more focused, and now have Cere... sorry, EA funding to draw upon.

Deex:
It's just a suggestion, but I'd be wary of delving too far into the Tales series. Tales of Vesperia is indeed excellent, easily my favourite RPG of this gen.

But it's also by far the best Tales game, the only other one of note being Tales of Symphonia, which is well regarded by some, but I thought it was a bit average.

Incidentally, anyone who hasn't played Tales of Vesperia, please give it a try. It is SO much better than all the other JRPGs available.

Yeah but right now BioWare isn't doing any better. Mass Effect 3? Dragon Age 2? The Old Republic? All these games are currently in development. BioWare aren't massive. They can't handle 3 big projects at the same time. I'm worried they might turn out mediocre just for that reason. If BioWare ever was focused, they're certainly not now.

And considering how successful Mass Effect 2 and Dragon Age both were, I wouldn't be surprised if EA made them rush the games out ASAP, just to get the cash flow started. Dragon Age 2 certainly didn't look ready for a February 2011 release, based on the screenshots I saw.

The Old Republic has been in production for some time though, so that's probably near release and BioWare can spare people for other projects. Mass Effect 3 still has time to go til a possible release. As stated on Mass Effect wiki:


Mass Effect 3 does not yet have an announced release date, though release timing will be based on maximising both "quality" and "commercial success". Project Director Casey Hudson has stated that development will be along the same kind of time frame as Mass Effect 2. Mass Effect 2 was released 2 years and 2 months after the release of the original Mass Effect, suggesting an early 2012 release, assuming development does end up following Mass Effect 2's time frame.

So there's still plenty of time for BioWare to work on it. Dragon Age II's production started sometime earlier this year, but while there is some information revealed about it, there's still not much to really go on or form a informed opinion of. The trailer for Dragon Age II is supposedly available for viewing on the 17th of this month (according to the Dragon Age II website), so that may shed some more light on this game.

The answer as I see it is that tastes really are changing. The core gamer demographics are higher in age than ever before, and older people mostly just don't have the patience for JRPGs. The fact of the matter is that JRPGs may be richer in story than most WRPGs, but grindtastic, rigidly-constructed gameplay just doesn't suit a story-based game. Adventure games are the way to go for that, as they can tell a story at a faster pace and every element of gameplay can be directly tied into the narrative.

WRPGs, on the other hand, allow the same kind of self-indulgent escapist fantasy that makes tabletop games so enduringly popular. Therefore, their place in the market is already secure and pretty much unshakable, while the only way the JRPG can thrive (or possibly even survive) an aging demographic is to transform into a more adventure-oriented design. If the japs ever grow enough brains to figure that out, they might make something that will make Tim Shafer cry himself to sleep for the rest of his life. Until then, they'll keep losing their market.

Dragon Age wasn't actually all that big a hit with the critics (it's Metacritic user score is pretty poor too, suggesting gamers tired of it quickly).

Now, I happen to like Dragon Age, but it was still just more of the same from Bioware. It didn't have the same budget as Mass Effect 2, because that had more obvious mainstream appeal (with its shooter feel and Star Warsesque universe).

But the mainstream are very hard to keep on your side for long. Final Fantasy was all the rage for a couple of years (the time of FF7 and FF8), but that fire cooled, when the mainstream remembered that snazzy graphics (as they were then) aside, they really don't like RPGs that much.

As much as any intrinsic quality in their games, Bioware will be trying to maintain their status as 'The Scene' or 'The Place to Be'.

Mass Effect is what brought them overground. RPG enthusiasts will also point to Baldur's Gate, KOTOR etc, but to the mainstream, they are simply the people who make Mass Effect.

To stay on top, they will need to action up their games, at the expense of the RPG elements (like Mass Effect 2 did), because action is a more popular genre.

This is already becoming a wedge issue, with people divided on the whole 'Streamlining versus Dumbing Down' matter. When (not if) they do this to Dragon Age, it'll flare up again.

The critics will be difficult to keep in line for long, also. Most reviewers accept that they just have to bite their tongues when 'The Next Big Thing' is rolling through town, because the dangers of being seen to be against it, are too steep.

How many reviewers gave Halo 3 full marks, when it was pretty obviously the least ambitious and interesting of the trilogy?

So I think Bioware can expect the critics to stay on-side for Mass Effect 3, unless it's truly awful. Bu seeing as how the public isn't anywhere near as fussed with Dragon Age, there will be likely be some that break cover and come out against it.

Dragon Age 2 will need to have some serious mainstream appeal, to get over the fact that the original came and went, without making a truly sizeable splash in anything but RPG circles.

have

x2

What's that all about?

Have what?

Just me being my weird, random self my brothah.

The answer as I see it is that tastes really are changing. The core gamer demographics are higher in age than ever before, and older people mostly just don't have the patience for JRPGs. The fact of the matter is that JRPGs may be richer in story than most WRPGs, but grindtastic, rigidly-constructed gameplay just doesn't suit a story-based game. Adventure games are the way to go for that, as they can tell a story at a faster pace and every element of gameplay can be directly tied into the narrative.

WRPGs, on the other hand, allow the same kind of self-indulgent escapist fantasy that makes tabletop games so enduringly popular. Therefore, their place in the market is already secure and pretty much unshakable, while the only way the JRPG can thrive (or possibly even survive) an aging demographic is to transform into a more adventure-oriented design. If the japs ever grow enough brains to figure that out, they might make something that will make Tim Shafer cry himself to sleep for the rest of his life. Until then, they'll keep losing their market.

I know I'm going to sound like a kiss ass here, but I do agree with everything in this post. Times have changed so many gamers may not have as much time to invest in a JRPG like they used to, therefore find WRPG's to be a alternative. JRPG's are pretty much 'stuck in the mud' where only the most truly hardcore gamer would pick up and play and even then, only if they had the time to invest in it.


Dragon Age wasn't actually all that big a hit with the critics (it's Metacritic user score is pretty poor too, suggesting gamers tired of it quickly).

I don't really consider reviews from online sources/magazines/etc myself. I prefer to play the game and form my own opinion on whether it's good or bad.


Now, I happen to like Dragon Age, but it was still just more of the same from Bioware. It didn't have the same budget as Mass Effect 2, because that had more obvious mainstream appeal (with its shooter feel and Star Warsesque universe).

I myself enjoyed both thoroughly and have finished them multiple times. While they may have similarities, they are both different games in their own right.


But the mainstream are very hard to keep on your side for long. Final Fantasy was all the rage for a couple of years (the time of FF7 and FF8), but that fire cooled, when the mainstream remembered that snazzy graphics (as they were then) aside, they really don't like RPGs that much.

Remember though, before FFVII, RPG's were a niche market only. Though I do agree the 'fire' (as you put it) has cooled, as more people come into the RPG genre which has been divided into two camps: Traditional JRPG's and Action based WRPG's. As times have changed and most gamers who originally played JRPG's have moved on to WRPG's.


The critics will be difficult to keep in line for long, also. Most reviewers accept that they just have to bite their tongues when 'The Next Big Thing' is rolling through town, because the dangers of being seen to be against it, are too steep.

Most critics nowadays honestly have no idea about games imo. Not all reviewers 'bite their tongues', some roast a game saying all these negative things about it, yet if you play it yourself there's a chance you'll enjoy it more than they did. Also, they don't have as much time to play the game to fully find out how it works etc, as they are usually under a deadline to get it done as soon as possible and move on to the next one in the list.


Dragon Age 2 will need to have some serious mainstream appeal, to get over the fact that the original came and went, without making a truly sizeable splash in anything but RPG circles.

Some fans have complained about what's known of Dragon Age 2, saying how it's limiting character creation etc, with only one preset character race to choose from. It's too early to criticize/form a opinion about it until more information comes out.

Everyone here raises some excellent points, all of which I've noticed(either by personal experience or watching the change in the market/consumer base itself). I find it best to listen to people's opinions on games via forums(like this one, obviously) or discussion boards rather than going to a 'professional' review site or even GameFAQs user reviews.

Some games I've even bought without any input just because I liked something about them...Growlanser was a prime example of that. I saw "Ooh, Working Designs!" and immediately bought it. Same thing happened with Elemental Gearbolt and Vanguard Bandits.

But I get WAY off topic...my tastes have more broadened than changed/shifted, actually. I still like to waste time playing standard JRPGs like Final Fantasy 1(THERE'S a time sink if there ever was one!) or Breath of Fire, but I also enjoy other games with more 'loose' RPG elements such as the aforementioned Vanguard Bandits, and as has been mentioned before, Mass Effect.

I guess I'm very tolerant of new things, for the most part...unlike some people(trolls?), I can handle predictability in a game if I have fun going through it. For me, that's one of the most important things: others include 'are you at least presenting it in a semi-original fashion?', and 'can I like at least some of the characters?'.

So far, most of the RPGs I've bought(blind or with forewarning) have delivered in that respect.

I don't know what this poor user acceptance you speak of is, but Dragon Age is the most successful game BioWare has ever made. It sold close to 6 million copies if I remember correctly. And of all the people I've asked, none of them were disappointed.

I understand how necessary it is though to dumb some things to appeal to more mainstream audiences. For me Dragon Age was a delight, because the market hasn't seen anything like it for years. A more action oriented would certainly be disappointing for me. Just like Mass Effect 2 was.

Edit: OK, how the fuck is a metacritic score of 91 and an average user score of 8.5, bad reception?!

Prak Hit the Spot with that post. Greatly explained. I agree completely too.

Final Fantasy 13 sold better than its predecessors out of the gate, and will likely outperform them over the life of this gen. But that doesn't stop people saying that the series is doomed, not as popular as it was etc etc.

Dragon Age was released on 3 formats (PS3, XBOX 360 and PC, compared to Mass Effect 2's two formats. But even at the most basic level, if you suggested to anyone that Dragon Age is Bioware's biggest and/or most important hit, you'd be laughed out of town (as soon as they remembered what Dragon Age was, anyway).

Actual sales do not equate to longterm popularity. Mass Effect 2 is praised highly across the net, Dragon Age is far more divided. It sold in large part, because of Bioware's name.

I've bought plenty of games, solely on the good name of the publisher, on hype or because it was a sequel to something I loved. (FF is making its entire living off of this now, to be honest!), only to be disappointed and quite disgusted with myself, that I bought something I have no interest in.

FF is a special, almost freakish case, because the big installments generated such massive acclaim and love, that public and critics alike, continually allow themselves to wonder 'Is this going to be the one, is this going to be when the series gets huge again?'

Again, I do actually like Dragon Age, but it isn't regarded as highly or considered anywhere near as important as Mass Effect, and you must surely see that.

My point was that they bought the first game, but unless Dragon Age 2 looks mightily more appealing to the average non RPG enthusiast gamer, they won't buy the second one.

Because all the evidence I've seen (on the net, and amongst my mates - who consider DA utterly boring), suggests the mainstream didn't take to it at all.

Also, in gaming, reviews reflect public trends, rather than shape them. Critics give the scores that they think gamers will accept. If they think the public won't be too bothered at them slagging off a big game, they'll point out its flaws (regardless of what score they give it).

Otherwise, they keep their traps shut, and rubber stamp yet another 'classic' that will be forgotten in a month or so.

The public (and so the critics) will only stay with Bioware, if they seem like they are 'The Scene'. I.e big graphics, big action, subdued RPG elements.

I'll put money on it.

Death:
You have freely admitted to being a fan of Bioware. But quite aside from that, you are 'one of us', not 'one of them'. I.e you like RPGs enough to come to a RPG forum, you're not someone who just dips into them when they are the latest craze.

I wouldn't expect you to follow their trends. And there are entitled to not like RPGs, but I'm concerned at what coddling the mainstream for their money, is doing to both WRPGs and JRPGs.


The long and short of it, is as I said before, I'm not wildly in love with either at the moment.

WRPGs have no variety, because only Bioware are making any, and (IMO anyway), they are stuck between repeating their old forumulas and selling out by dumbing down.

Meanwhile, JRPGs are in crisis because Jap developers simply don't get the West, anymore than we get the East. By trying to western their games, they are making horrendous East/West mish-mashs.


People can like what they want. The thread asked, I've given my opinion, I stand by it. Everyone else is entitled to their opinion too.

If Bioware come out with a genuinely interesting new IP, and/or produce a game that truly breaks with their tired formula, and shows me something of real emotional and intellectual interest, I'll be the first one in line.

If its just KOTOR again, with jazzier graphics, less RPGness and the same old 'Save the Old Woman or garotte her in front of her children, because you'll get more money that way' morally farcical wish fulfillment/empowerment exercise, then count me out.

well mass effect 2 now coming out on the PS3.I wonder what effect that will have ?
Makes no sense though that the first mass effect isn't coming out on the PS3 as well.

Seems to me the time is ripe for a combo game..a joint effort between a western developer such as bioware and a Japanese developer such as Square-Enix...and FF would be excellent choice for such a move.

I think a western developer would be game for such a project but I think people like Kitase and Toriyama would be against it.They would feel insulted..their pride would be hurt.
Just my opinion though.

It'll never happen. And whilst it would be an utterly unique experience, it would also almost certainly be an utter train wreck of a game.

Plus the simple mercenary fact is, you don't help a guy up when you've got him down. If you've got the spotlight, you keep it as long as you can.

Everyone wants to be the company to develop the next IP that really grabs and genuinely excites both public and critics. The company that makes the next 'Final Fantasy 7, Metal Gear Solid, Halo etc etc.

As it is I agree it probably won't happen absence a total collapse by Square.

If its just KOTOR again, with jazzier graphics, less RPGness and the same old 'Save the Old Woman or garotte her in front of her children, because you'll get more money that way' morally farcical wish fulfillment/empowerment exercise, then count me out.

You know that's exactly how I felt Dragon Age when I saw it. Everything was so goddamn familiar.

WRPGs have no variety, because only Bioware are making any, and (IMO anyway), they are stuck between repeating their old forumulas and selling out by dumbing down.

Just popping in to snipe at this incredibly stupid statement.

Bethesda
Obsidian
Lionhead

That is all. Continue arguing.

Final Fantasy 13 sold better than its predecessors out of the gate, and will likely outperform them over the life of this gen.

Initial sales for FFXIII were quite good. However, the returns were also high. Also, the retail price has dropped substantially (within a month, it was being sold for $10AUSD at one game store).


But that doesn't stop people saying that the series is doomed, not as popular as it was etc etc.

Unless SE does change how they make games, the series is doomed.


Dragon Age was released on 3 formats (PS3, XBOX 360 and PC, compared to Mass Effect 2's two formats. But even at the most basic level, if you suggested to anyone that Dragon Age is Bioware's biggest and/or most important hit, you'd be laughed out of town (as soon as they remembered what Dragon Age was, anyway).

Maybe in stores near you, not for me.


I've bought plenty of games, solely on the good name of the publisher, on hype or because it was a sequel to something I loved. (FF is making its entire living off of this now, to be honest!), only to be disappointed and quite disgusted with myself, that I bought something I have no interest in.

I think every gamer is guilty of that at least once in their gaming lives.


FF is a special, almost freakish case, because the big installments generated such massive acclaim and love, that public and critics alike, continually allow themselves to wonder 'Is this going to be the one, is this going to be when the series gets huge again?'

I can't speak for everyone else here, but tbh I've grown disenchanted with the FF series now, since the PS2 Generation (I don't count FFXI Online, as that is a MMORPG, which is a different animal to a console RPG) and while I hope that the next console FF does rectify what has come before on the PS2, I'm not holding my breath.


Again, I do actually like Dragon Age, but it isn't regarded as highly or considered anywhere near as important as Mass Effect, and you must surely see that.

There is a large fan base for the Dragon Age series, as it is slowly growing. Remember, Mass Effect was available a year or so before Dragon Age: Origins, so Mass Effect had at least a full year to generate it's fanbase. Give Dragon Age some time, and it's fanbase would be just as large as Mass Effect's.


My point was that they bought the first game, but unless Dragon Age 2 looks mightily more appealing to the average non RPG enthusiast gamer, they won't buy the second one.

Not many gamers, who aren't RPG fans, have considered RPG's as a viable genre for them to enjoy. RPG's, even though they are part of the mainstream genre's, are still a niche market. Until more titles become available, which appeal more to the average gamer, I doubt RPG sales will increase as a whole.


Because all the evidence I've seen (on the net, and amongst my mates - who consider DA utterly boring), suggests the mainstream didn't take to it at all.

Most gamers have a genre they tend to stick to, and RPG's are (as I said above) are still a niche market/genre.


Also, in gaming, reviews reflect public trends, rather than shape them. Critics give the scores that they think gamers will accept. If they think the public won't be too bothered at them slagging off a big game, they'll point out its flaws (regardless of what score they give it).

Otherwise, they keep their traps shut, and rubber stamp yet another 'classic' that will be forgotten in a month or so.

Most reviewers, imo, are biased towards certain games and don't really give them the proper amount of time to give a game a good review (mainly due to time restraints for individual reviews etc).


The public (and so the critics) will only stay with Bioware, if they seem like they are 'The Scene'. I.e big graphics, big action, subdued RPG elements.

Let's hope so.


Death:
You have freely admitted to being a fan of Bioware. But quite aside from that, you are 'one of us', not 'one of them'. I.e you like RPGs enough to come to a RPG forum, you're not someone who just dips into them when they are the latest craze.

I've always enjoyed RPG's, stemming from when I was in secondary school and played the old AD&D table top RPG's. I most probably will continue to do so, as majority of RPG's have a great story, great characters etc. Which I hope that future RPG's do have... all the elements of what made Fantasy novellas and the original AD&D great (IMO that is)


I wouldn't expect you to follow their trends. And there are entitled to not like RPGs, but I'm concerned at what coddling the mainstream for their money, is doing to both WRPGs and JRPGs.

Game companies make a product to get money... some will do whatever it takes, to ensure they get revenue in to keep them rolling.


WRPGs have no variety, because only Bioware are making any, and (IMO anyway), they are stuck between repeating their old forumulas and selling out by dumbing down.

As of recent times, only BioWare has made recent steps with WRPG's. There have been others (Sierra, Bethesda and Obsidian for example, which have made great games and I honestly hope they continue (Mainly hoping against hope for Sierra to make a comeback...)), and I hope other western developers consider RPG's as a viable option for a future project.


If its just KOTOR again, with jazzier graphics, less RPGness and the same old 'Save the Old Woman or garotte her in front of her children, because you'll get more money that way' morally farcical wish fulfillment/empowerment exercise, then count me out.

I can't speak for everyone, but I enjoy the whole 'Good/Evil' aspect BioWare has in their games. I've played a few BioWare games, both as Good Hero and Evil Hero, and enjoyed both aspects (Particularly in KotOR). BioWare is following the same adage, that even the company Koei is following with their Dynasty Warriors series:

If it aint broken, why fix it?

FFXIII must only be good up until the part I stopped playing at, because I don't think it's nearly as bad as everybody else does.

I've bought plenty of games, solely on the good name of the publisher, on hype or because it was a sequel to something I loved. (FF is making its entire living off of this now, to be honest!), only to be disappointed and quite disgusted with myself, that I bought something I have no interest in.

I think every gamer is guilty of that at least once in their gaming lives.

Command and Conquer 4 appears in big glowing red letters in my head right now. Good thing they accepted it when I tried to return it.

Since we're talking about WRPG's and dumbing stuff down, I'd like to bring up Fallout 3, because it successfully managed 2 things current generation sequels of significantly older games usually don't. Fallout 1 and 2 were incredibly complex and were only on the PC, and since Fallout 3 also came out on consoles, obviously some things had to be dumbed down. The other was the graphics. The original Fallouts were top-down 2D, while Fallout 3 played more like an FPS, (or TPS if you like that weird view). That alone meant singificant gameplay changes, let alone the HD upgrade.

Well, Fallout 3 was such a surprise for me, because there really wasn't all that much dumbing down. The RPG elements are surpisingly deep, and there is a lot of variety. OK, the story wasn't up to much and neither were the moral choices, but being one of the very few people who doesn't really care about stories in RPG's, that didn't bother me so much. It was impressive to see a successful transition like this.

As far as BioWare goes, I think they've got a good thing going for now. Mass Effect 2's RPG aspect suffered a lot, and there honestly wasn't much role-playing to be had, and I think that's what let a lot of the fans down. There were certain aspects of Mass Effect that needed improving, but BioWare simply removed them entirely in ME2. If you look at ME2 as an RPG, it doesn't have much to offer. But when you look at it as action game, it is quite good. The gunplay works pretty well and the writing is solid. My biggest complaint in this case would be the lack of variety. There's only 4 weapons, very few abilities, and the majority of the game is spent firing behind cover. Yahtzee made me think of ME2 when he talked about sequels in his Crackdown 2 review, where he said a sequel having more stuff in it than the original was supposed to be taken as red.

Still, considering that BioWare has 2 major franchises in this console generation (Mass Effect and Dragon Age), I like this contrast they create. Dragon Age is more tactical, while Mass Effect is more action-oriented. And there really is nothing wrong with either one of those. Both hardcore RPG gamers and mainstream action gamers can appreciate BioWare's games. As long as this contrast remains, that is. Yes, I'm looking at you Dragon Age 2.


FFXIII must only be good up until the part I stopped playing at, because I don't think it's nearly as bad as everybody else does.

FFXIII gets better near the end, if anything. But it takes too bloody long to get there. It is a bit of a waste of time imo, and while the battle system had some interesting ideas it still wasn't particularly good even when you got the open world. I admit though, I am looking a bit forward to VersusXIII.

Cent:
FF13's a decent game, as I'm glad you're experiencing it to be. At the end of the day, what you think about the games you play, is really all that matters.

Prak:
I should have thought it was fairly obvious what I was getting at, without having to spell it out for you.

Obsidian have been pilloried for their WRPG games (especially in recent times), and they clearly don't have the resources to make a game that looks and plays with the quality that modern gamers expect.

Bethesda have made what... Elder Scolls, recently? And that's going back a ways now.

My point was that I don't think anyone can argue we're in any danger of being spoiled for choice here. Bioware are the only company who are releasing WRPGs with any frequency (and by frequently, I mean once or twice a year, if you're very lucky).

Unless I'm missing hordes of new WRPGs that are coming out. What are the retailers doing - putting them under the counter as I walk in?

Unless we delve into the time honoured (and deeply boring) argument of 'PC Gaming versus the Universe', which I am in no hurry to start up for its 5000th chapter.


Death:
Your experience of returned games is entirely personal though, would you not agree? Just asking a few questions in your local area, really doesn't amount to very credible evidence of anything.

The point is that marketing, hype, nostalgia etc play a big part in FF sales now. Even if the game got 1/10 from every critic going, it'd still sell huge. And thus, we can't infer anything from sales in this case.

Popularity can only be gagued (and even then, not in any kind of accurate way), by looking around the internet and seeing what people are saying, and for how long they keep saying it.


You claim the series is doomed, unless they change what they are doing. And yet the critics did laud them in the recent games for doing exactly that. It's just the fans that didn't.

Like I said before, FF just seems to be special in this regard. It may not be the cat's whiskers anymore, but it still manages to sell huge numbers of copies, simply because people remember the good times.

I think you're seriously in denial about Dragon Age. There's no way its as popular or as prominent as Dragon Age. Most reviews that I saw (from critics and gamers), labelled its world as familar and routine (although well executed IMO).

DA was the source of many critics' low expectations for ME2, because they were so disappointed at how backward and old school DA had been.

I'm not going to go round and round on this. Basically, you must be looking in different sections of the internet, and know much more fantasy friendly people than me.

Because my experience of what people say about the game (when they do), is more along the lines of what Top said.

RPGs are niche, but Mass Effect (particularly ME2) is not. But IPs like this don't come along ten a penny. If it was easy to make the next Halo (or whatever), then everyone would do it.

We are in agreement about critics, as we established ages ago. They reflect the opinion that they think their readers want to see.

People want to feel that the big games are worth waiting for, and are worth the money they spend. They buy mags and look at review sites to hear good news on this front.

They don't care if these places praise a big game which turns out to be rubbish, but they will despise them if they slag a popular and much anticipated game off.

It's classic 'Shoot the Messenger'. Most won't believe the review if they say it is poor, practically all will still buy the game. And they will never, ever, under any circumstances admit the mag was right after the fact.

I echo your sentiments about Sierra, who I would dearly love to see return to grace. (They did do F.E.A.R, which isn't a RPG admittedly, but it's a pretty decent game).

Obsidian... well, like I say, they just don't seem to have the resources. I love KOTOR 2, it's still my favourite one of these type of games (because Bioware just can't do evil - all their villains are camp and sound like they belong in WWE).

But unless they find some more money to hire better technical staff, I just can't seem them breaking through. Alpha Protocol had some great ideas, and a ruggedly enjoyable story, but it played like...

'If it ain't broke, why fix it?' is no excuse to be as slavishly formulaic as Bioware are being. The same basic breakdown of levels, increasingly familiar moral dilemmas, deeply underdeveloped main plotlines...

I mean, that whole thing with the Collectors, was the most gigantic waste of time, ever. It didn't advance the story one little bit! And to top it all off, the collectors were so utterly boring, as well!

And whilst they put some great characters in their games, is it too much to ask, to have them actually do something in the main plot?!

I remember saying this to you ages ago, but consider Wrex. Hugely popular character, but what does he do? There's the scene on the beach where you might have to kill him, and... what?

I mean, you're evidently not satisfied with the current situation yourself. Unless you've changed your opinions in the last couple of days, you stated earlier that you too are jaded with both WRPGs and JRPGs.

So disagreements about Bioware's recent merits aside (and again, I like their games, I just don't like how things are going right now), I've said my piece.

I'm not digging my heels in over this, I'm not saying Bioware are terrible, I'm not saying I hate WRPGs. I can only call things as I see them, which at the moment, are not meeting my needs.

while i did say it hasnt changed, i smply discovered that WRPGS offer me something else: complete freedom.
by that, i mean, i can go anywhere i want uninterrupted by suddenly teleporting into a battle. Wrpgs offer me when to fight, how to fight, and if i even want to fight.

JPRGS, however, have better stories and, most of the time, more character developing.

WRPG offer freedom at the cost of developing uninteresting storylines. If you want good engaging storyline with WRPG freedom, How will you handle the Narration? that's the big question.

Though, I don't think that freedom is the answer to the problem with JRPG.

Prak:
I should have thought it was fairly obvious what I was getting at, without having to spell it out for you.

Spell it out? More like frantically attempt to justify a statement you now realize was a bad idea, but cannot bring yourself to openly admit was wrong.


Obsidian have been pilloried for their WRPG games (especially in recent times), and they clearly don't have the resources to make a game that looks and plays with the quality that modern gamers expect.

You're being unfair to them. Most of their games have been follow-ups to games made by other companies, and while it is true that their products may not have been as good as their predecessors, they were still good games in their own right.


Bethesda have made what... Elder Scolls, recently? And that's going back a ways now.

You fail to account for Fallout 3. Granted, they don't release games very often, but when they do, they're typically worthy of special attention.

You also fail to comment about Lionhead. Peter Molyneaux may be a self-absorbed douche in the same way Richard Garriott was once famous for being, but the Fable series is certainly notable.


My point was that I don't think anyone can argue we're in any danger of being spoiled for choice here. Bioware are the only company who are releasing WRPGs with any frequency (and by frequently, I mean once or twice a year, if you're very lucky).

You're right about there being a dearth of titles, but to say that Bioware was the only company making WRPGs was still retarded. If you back away from a retarded comment, you can at least save face. Trying to defend it just makes you look like a titanic douchebag.


Unless we delve into the time honoured (and deeply boring) argument of 'PC Gaming versus the Universe', which I am in no hurry to start up for its 5000th chapter.

Good idea. That would inevitably lead to discussion about The Witcher, which would make me avoid this site for another year or two.

Need I remind you that Eidos is also making a new Deus Ex? There are others with WRPG's besides BioWare, who by the way aren't the only ones frequently releasing titles. Fallout: New Vegas is coming 2 years after Fallout 3 and Fable III is coming 2 years after Fable II.

I tend to avoid most games that could be summarised as "derivative anime schlock" now days, so that rules out most JRPGs. I also tend to find linear games of any variety fairly boring (so Final Fantasy, but also Half Life 2, Bioshock etc.), unless they are 2D side-scrollers, for whatever reason. I guess when you're given a 3D environment it just doesn't feel right to be confided to a very rigid path?

So yeah, all about WRPGs now days, especially the ones with a significant simulation component like Gothic and Darklands.

Death:
Your experience of returned games is entirely personal though, would you not agree? Just asking a few questions in your local area, really doesn't amount to very credible evidence of anything.

Still worth taking note of imo. That was also from asking at over a dozen game stores I've been to over the last few years, so is still valid imo. Point is, no one takes into account the amount of games returned, after initial release. If anyone actually DID a 'proper survey to accrue credible evidence', I'm pretty damn sure their results would come pretty close to my own observations.


The point is that marketing, hype, nostalgia etc play a big part in FF sales now. Even if the game got 1/10 from every critic going, it'd still sell huge. And thus, we can't infer anything from sales in this case.

Yet the majority of gaming magazines etc, rave on about the numbers a game sold in it's initial release week/month. They use that amount just to fuel the fanfare about a game, regarding how 'great it is', when it probably isn't. Some games may have high scores and recommendations for them, but it comes down to the gamer in question, yes?


Popularity can only be gagued (and even then, not in any kind of accurate way), by looking around the internet and seeing what people are saying, and for how long they keep saying it.

Exactly.


You claim the series is doomed, unless they change what they are doing. And yet the critics did laud them in the recent games for doing exactly that. It's just the fans that didn't.

It is doomed. The critics that 'did laud them in the recent games' more often than not said that just for the sake of saying it and not for any true belief in them. SE's recent games (while they may receive high scores for reviews etc) have fallen in standard to comparison with earlier games SE have made. Yes, that's just my own view... but I'm willing to bet that their are others who share that.


Like I said before, FF just seems to be special in this regard. It may not be the cat's whiskers anymore, but it still manages to sell huge numbers of copies, simply because people remember the good times.

If I can make a personal observation here: I've been following the FF series since FF1 on the NES, and just from my own view, the series rose while on the NES, then SNES and then over to the PSX/PS1. 9 great games (only mentioning the main numbered series. FFT is a good game, but there are others in that genre which are just as good, if not better. FFMQ is a joke) which really did help elevate the series (and did what Hironobu Sakaguchi foretold, saved Square's ass from bankruptcy). The PS2 generation of FF's and onward (FFX, FFX-2, FFXII and FFXIII) while may have introduced a younger generation to the series, to some who have followed from the very beginning, it's been a slap in the face (my own opinion.). Mediocre characters you can't attach to, watered down same old fantasy story (FFXII was just a retelling/rip off of Star Wars), nothing really much there to keep people with it.


I think you're seriously in denial about Dragon Age. There's no way its as popular or as prominent as Dragon Age. Most reviews that I saw (from critics and gamers), labelled its world as familar and routine (although well executed IMO).

I think your seriously in denial about my not accepting your opinion/view of Dragon Age. There is a strong fanbase for this game, and while some (Probably the same critics and gamers you mention) have said negative things about this game, there are those who have applauded it. I've spoken to friends who have had mixed opinions about Dragon Age, however there is one thing about it, which they do see eye to eye with: How it feels like a fantasy novel (Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance, any fantasy style novella) and that is what draws them (and probably others) to Dragon Age. A remembrance of those novels that they grew up with, or those who played the old AD&D tabletop RPG's.


DA was the source of many critics' low expectations for ME2, because they were so disappointed at how backward and old school DA had been.

Most recent critics wouldn't know a good game if it leaped up and bit their damn dicks off. Some reviewers/critics don't really care about the game they're reviewing... all they care about is getting paid.


I'm not going to go round and round on this. Basically, you must be looking in different sections of the internet, and know much more fantasy friendly people than me.

Because my experience of what people say about the game (when they do), is more along the lines of what Top said.

To each their own.


RPGs are niche, but Mass Effect (particularly ME2) is not. But IPs like this don't come along ten a penny. If it was easy to make the next Halo (or whatever), then everyone would do it.

The Mass Effect series is classified as a Action RPG, even gaming magazines state that, as well as BioWare themselves.


We are in agreement about critics, as we established ages ago. They reflect the opinion that they think their readers want to see.

Yes, on this we agree.


People want to feel that the big games are worth waiting for, and are worth the money they spend. They buy mags and look at review sites to hear good news on this front.

Which is why I don't buy magazines or look at review sites. I prefer to rent the game in question and try it out myself. Then I'll decide whether to buy it or not.


They don't care if these places praise a big game which turns out to be rubbish, but they will despise them if they slag a popular and much anticipated game off.

The generic masses are more often that note illiterate when it comes to games nowadays.


It's classic 'Shoot the Messenger'. Most won't believe the review if they say it is poor, practically all will still buy the game. And they will never, ever, under any circumstances admit the mag was right after the fact.

No comment to this as I don't buy gaming magazines.


I echo your sentiments about Sierra, who I would dearly love to see return to grace. (They did do F.E.A.R, which isn't a RPG admittedly, but it's a pretty decent game).

Sierra made some great games, and while I never played F.E.A.R, I still fondly remember Sierra's other games for great storyline, hilarious and memorable characters.


Obsidian... well, like I say, they just don't seem to have the resources. I love KOTOR 2, it's still my favourite one of these type of games (because Bioware just can't do evil - all their villains are camp and sound like they belong in WWE).

But unless they find some more money to hire better technical staff, I just can't seem them breaking through. Alpha Protocol had some great ideas, and a ruggedly enjoyable story, but it played like...

I just wish KotORII: TSL was complete when it was released, and not missing parts. Obsidian can make great games as I do enjoy Alpha Protocol (Which critics/etc have roasted) and I hope that the next game they make they learn from what they did wrong with Alpha Protocol.


'If it ain't broke, why fix it?' is no excuse to be as slavishly formulaic as Bioware are being. The same basic breakdown of levels, increasingly familiar moral dilemmas, deeply underdeveloped main plotlines...

That's your opinion and most probably the same as a lot of other gamers, critics etc. There are also those who do think the opposite as you do. Freedom of choice.


I mean, that whole thing with the Collectors, was the most gigantic waste of time, ever. It didn't advance the story one little bit! And to top it all off, the collectors were so utterly boring, as well!

I'll say the next here:

The Collectors were a result of genetic brainwashing and modification, done by the Reapers, from their original forms of Protheans. Harbinger, a Reaper, was the one controlling them as they were devoid of emotion and thought. As the Reapers themselves weren't in the game (rather manipulating things, like a Puppetmaster does with their puppets), the Collectors were their stand in, and also showed what actually happened to the Protheans. In Mass Effect, we were told they were wiped out, that some Protheans were brainwashed by the Reapers into infiltrating other Prothean strongholds to bring them down from within.

The Collectors were there as a 'face' for the player to see, a visible threat against what is considered (ingame at least) as a false threat: The Reapers. Seeing what had happened to the Protheans, then seeing the final boss (The Human Reaper hybrid) more or less implied that the fate of the Protheans would fall on the Human Race as well.

I will say, the Collectors were needed as a plot device.


And whilst they put some great characters in their games, is it too much to ask, to have them actually do something in the main plot?!

Remember, Mass Effect 2 is the second part of a trilogy. From my view, the plot was to stop the Collectors from assimilating the Human Race into something similar to what they became, which would also of helped their masters when they returned from Dark Space.


I remember saying this to you ages ago, but consider Wrex. Hugely popular character, but what does he do? There's the scene on the beach where you might have to kill him, and... what?

The result of whether to kill Wrex or not, is only lightly resolved in Mass Effect 2. I think we'll see more of that choice in Mass Effect 3.


I mean, you're evidently not satisfied with the current situation yourself. Unless you've changed your opinions in the last couple of days, you stated earlier that you too are jaded with both WRPGs and JRPGs.

No, I am jaded with both WRPG's and JRPG's, however I am more willing to play WRPG's as I feel they have matured for mature gamers. That's just my own opinion.


So disagreements about Bioware's recent merits aside (and again, I like their games, I just don't like how things are going right now), I've said my piece.

Personally, I feel that most of the arguments about BioWare's recent games etc, can be attributed to EA buying BioWare a few years ago. KotOR and Jade Empire for example, two great games made before EA sunk their claws in, have still stood well imo.


I'm not digging my heels in over this, I'm not saying Bioware are terrible, I'm not saying I hate WRPGs. I can only call things as I see them, which at the moment, are not meeting my needs.

Honestly, I'd love it if a company would make a RPG like the old AD&D PC games. I truly loved and enjoyed those RPG's.

Hey there, Prak. Put up your guns there, pardner! 'Trying to justify a statement that was just wrong?' I'm on numerous threads on this board, talking about Alpha Protocol, Fallout 3 etc. What did I do - just forget them?! It was a generalised comment that all we seem to get is Bioware stuff, these days. You can believe what you want, I know what I meant. But hey, for the record, that statement when taken literally, obviously isn't true. Let's move on.

Because it doesn't alter my point which is that compared to the number of JRPGs around, we seem to have little choice each year, besides Bioware's near annual release rate. And we seem to agree on this, literal interpretations of what I said, notwithstanding. Take Bethesda, as was mentioned. They've released Fallout 3 and Elder Scrolls, in what... 5-6 years, something like that. Meanwhile, there have been... I can't even imagine how many JRPGs released in that space of time, even narrowing it down to one company like Square etc.

And hey hey hey, I'm not being unfair to Obsidian at all. If you look at my posts on this forum, you'll see I have the utmost respect for them (the fact I cite KOTOR 2 as my favourite modern WRPG may have given it away). But you can't deny that it was a chronically unfinished product, or that Alpha Protocol was a very rough around the edges game, despite many good ideas. And again, their output considering this up and down quality, is just too slow. If they were coming out with classics, like Bethesda are, then it might be alright. But long absences punctuated by fairly scrappy looking and playing games, hasn't done their credibility any favours. I wish it were otherwise, because like I say, I really do like them.


And no, the 'PC gaming snobs versus Everyone' argument is one that no-one, man or beast can hope to survive.

I would like to make a point on the freedom thing in WRPGs. I absolutely agree that freedom is a big selling point to a game like Fallout 3 or Elder Scrolls. I didn't complete the main quests until I'd done pretty much everything else (which turned out to be a very wise move, as both games have awful main plots).

But Bioware games? I would argue they only really offer an illusion of freedom, over something that is still pretty linear. There is a severe limit to what you can get up to, outside of the main plot. The side quests tend to be very short, and usually take place in areas related to the main quest (i.e you don't generally get whole new areas of universe to explore - just small merc bases etc). There aren't (for want of a better term) 'Guild' style sub-plots with their own ongoing stories etc. Rather than being the huge opened ended 'You could potentially go anywhere and do anything' experiences that a tabletop RPG would give you (limited only by your and your GM's imaginations), Bioware's games are more like a 'Choose your own Adventure' book, offering you different paths through the same basic experience.

That's just my take on it, anyway.

I seem to agree with most of Vrykolas posts so far. The current state of WRPGs aren't any better than the JRPGs. There are hardcore WRPG fans who feels that newer WRPGs are dumbed down from their previous iterations as much as some hardcore fans feel about JRPGs.

That said, my tastes in JRPGs actually haven't changed in the slightest to be honest, and I've been playing JRPGs since Phantasy Star II. I also don't feel that the newer JRPGs aren't nearly as bad as fans claim, sans Resonance of Fate (too convoluted for its own good imo). JRPGs are almost the same they've always been, with differences of course. I chalk up this current anti-JRPG sentiment is due to Western tastes changing, because alot of arguments against JRPGs seem to be minute imo, like "emo" characters and linearity, common elements in JRPGs for ages.

The double standards is very annoying. It's like when people complain that JRPGs have really slow starts (which to be fair, they often do), and then have a go at FF13 when it starts with all guns blazing, because they haven't had any build up and don't know what's going on.

But how much do you really need to know at that point? You're controlling the girl with the sword, those guys with guns are trying to kill you...

I think that's ample information to be going on with!

Then again, the slow start to many of today's JRPGs do them no favours. 'Infiinite Undiscovery' for example is no classic, but it's a hell of a lot better than the dreadful first couple of hours implies. The same can be said of Star Ocean 4 as well, as that game doesn't really get going until around the time you meet Bacchus. And the second half of the game is excellent.

It hasn't been a vintage gen for JRPGs so far, but there is some good stuff out there. Tales of Vesperia and Eternal Sonata are the only ones I would reccomend without reservation, but the others I've mentioned have their moments too.

The double standards is very annoying. It's like when people complain that JRPGs have really slow starts (which to be fair, they often do), and then have a go at FF13 when it starts with all guns blazing, because they haven't had any build up and don't know what's going on.


You resolve that with an skippable introductory Narration :P

my taste in RPGs is still pretty much the same as always. if i dont like i game i dont like it..doesnt matter if its new or old. my thoughts on newer games though is that they are made more as eye candy rather than for gameplay

My tastes have not shifted. Looking at this from another paragon, it's not that we are revolving around the room, rather the room is revolving around us.
What we usually love is no longer there. But, even THAT is a very narrow-minded view.
Taking this topic seriously, I KNOW there are still live and kicking JRPG series' out there. It's just that it never came in English, because America obviously controls the whole English-speaking community's taste in games. Our tastes haven't changed. Our tastes have been given a slap across the face by the world, pointing its finger at us, telling us

"Look buddy, see those games? You're not getting them. Just play what the others are playing, and stop giving us so much trouble!"

Not much can be done here, since I am able to play games because they translated them in the first place.

But don't complain. There are about a little under a HUNDRED good games that are in English you have not tried. For better or for worse, these games actually came here. Or taking into consideration another view, they are MADE here. For example, Shadow Madness. A JRPG, on the PSX, made by western developers. I love that game. What the unpolished battle system lacks is easily made up by the hilarious script.

How about the Megami Tensei series? That shi has branched series', for goodness sakes! I rarely have time for modern games, and I have like a backlog of awesome games in my bookmarks. Not to mention, games on the PSP like Half-Hero Minute, Yggdra Union, some of the more obscure, but freaking amazing games. In English, even.

In my opinion, there are no such things as deteriorating quality, rather a perception of increasing quality in others, making it seem like what we already have is doodoo. Taking account this sort of thought logically, it is quite an insane train of thought. But were talking about games, there is no need for logic, right? WRONG. Why do we enjoy games? It's fun, and although it seems like a time waster, we'd rather be sharpening our aim/increasing our vocabulary/learn about a certain topic or whatever we can possibly gain from games. Unless, we would put ourselves and our liver in danger by spending on expensive grog and be depressed all day in the bar. No thanks.

Sorry, that last paragraph went a little offtrack. All in all, we humans want change. Some faster than others. Change too fast, and you might miss a few steps. So slow down, and take a look at what we've missed.

P.S. A lot of you guys play many games from mainstream developers, from what I can observe. Yeah. Change that for a while. Any of you guys played Valkyrie Profile? I'm guessing a 100% of you have, though, since it was pretty mainstream back then :/

If I were to recommend you guys a game, try Dark Cloud 2. The first one, if you can tolerate its mediocre system. DC2 combines WRPG and JRPG feel. Although I'm not into reviews, the game had a 9.1 average out of 50+ reviewers. Why? It appealed to both sides of the earth, and more importantly, both tastes of RPG.

P.S.S. Can't wait for Versus and Last Story. The former because it's made by the Kingdom Hearts team, WITHOUT THE KINGDOM HEARTS! Their brilliant music, gameplay, features, graphics, and overall satisfying combo-play. The story in KH...sucks. I guess. The latter because it's made by Hironobu "The Fucking Man" Sakaguchi. Dammit, I also forgot about Xenoblade. Four 10/10 reviews. Reviews don't decide what I play and don't play. They give me hype. Makes me not just excited, but EXCITE☆BIKE☆TO☆THE☆MAX.

I agree with nisbahmumtaz about reviews meaning little when it comes to what games i will or wont play. A lot of the games i have liked got terrible reviews and others that got 10 out of 10 i hated

while many people are only really interested in the game company main game titles, its often the lesser known ones that are more fun to play, and also stay fairly simple in comparison

Thanks.
By the way, love your username.
JYUNEN HAIYAINDAYO!