Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

[Opinions lol] Whatever happened to the RPG?

12357

Posts

  • GnomeTankGnomeTank Registered User regular
    -Tal wrote: »
    -Tal wrote: »
    COD Multiplayer is absolutely an RPG.

    nope.avi

    why not?

    I would call it a Meta RPG. The meta state around the game certainly has RPG elements, but the game itself has none. It's a first person shooter with meta RPG elements.

    Or more specifically, the RPG elements are not integral to the game. You could change XP to cheese wheels, and make people spend cheese wheels to unlock things, it wouldn't change the core game at all. People might wonder why they were earning cheese wheels to shoot people, but the core game is exactly the same.

    Sagroth wrote: »
    Oh c'mon FyreWulff, no one's gonna pay to visit Uranus.
    Steam: Brainling, XBL / PSN: GnomeTank, NintendoID: Brainling, FF14: Zillius Rosh
  • -Tal-Tal We wasn't supposed to make it past 25 Joke's on you, we still aliveRegistered User regular
    What exactly does "Meta RPG" mean?

    w2mSpH.jpg
  • LanrutconLanrutcon Registered User regular
    mrt144 wrote: »
    -Tal wrote: »
    -Tal wrote: »
    COD Multiplayer is absolutely an RPG.

    nope.avi

    why not?

    No bard class.

    No antidotes.

    The ease of access when it comes to guides/faqs/spoilers/cheats/exploits probably impacts content length rather dramatically. You also have to ask what the player is trying to get out of it. Take Diablo 2, for example. 'Hardcore' players plug hundreds of hours into perma-death characters, mf runs, etc while your average joe probably just completes the normal difficulty once and calls it a day. Same game, different goals, different content lengths.

    Capture.jpg~original
    Currently playing: FFXIV: ARR and Sharepoint.
  • GnomeTankGnomeTank Registered User regular
    -Tal wrote: »
    What exactly does "Meta RPG" mean?

    The meta elements of Call of Duty are RPG elements, but the core game play doesn't have a lick of RPG to it.

    Sagroth wrote: »
    Oh c'mon FyreWulff, no one's gonna pay to visit Uranus.
    Steam: Brainling, XBL / PSN: GnomeTank, NintendoID: Brainling, FF14: Zillius Rosh
  • -Tal-Tal We wasn't supposed to make it past 25 Joke's on you, we still aliveRegistered User regular
    GnomeTank wrote: »
    -Tal wrote: »
    What exactly does "Meta RPG" mean?

    The meta elements of Call of Duty are RPG elements, but the core game play doesn't have a lick of RPG to it.

    What separates "meta elements" from the core game play?

    w2mSpH.jpg
  • PonyPony Registered User regular
    -Tal wrote: »
    GnomeTank wrote: »
    -Tal wrote: »
    What exactly does "Meta RPG" mean?

    The meta elements of Call of Duty are RPG elements, but the core game play doesn't have a lick of RPG to it.

    What separates "meta elements" from the core game play?

    You gear your guy up and choose his perks and shit before you start playing

    once you start playing the game, it's FPS boilerplate gameplay all the way down

    the RPG elements of the game are outside the actual playing of it, they're in the set-up phase

    i believe the comparison he's making is opposed to say

    JRPGs or something like the original Fallout games, where there's prep and management stuff outside the combat and interaction with the gameworld, but your interaction with the game world (including combat) is done via menu navigation and click buttons on the screen

    as opposed to just

    you know

    real time shooting dudes

  • -Tal-Tal We wasn't supposed to make it past 25 Joke's on you, we still aliveRegistered User regular
    Okay, but that's just an action RPG. Lots of RPGs don't have menu-based gameplay. Is Secret of Mana just a beat 'em up?

    w2mSpH.jpg
  • DehumanizedDehumanized Registered User regular
    the difference is in the numbers on the screen, right

    secret of mana required you to enter menus to just cast a spell, though

    maybe it'd be more helpful to define the difference between borderlands and codmp

    steam_sig.png
  • PonyPony Registered User regular
    -Tal wrote: »
    Okay, but that's just an action RPG. Lots of RPGs don't have menu-based gameplay. Is Secret of Mana just a beat 'em up?

    i dunno bro but when you talk about "meta elements" vs. "gameplay elements", that's usually the divide

    prep/upkeep work vs. playing the dang game

  • BethrynBethryn Registered User regular
    There's basically no such thing as a pure nothing-but-RPG RPG. There's just a couple of boxes that we group things into when they have similar focus to other things to allow us to find stuff we'd like.

    If you try to define elements of an RPG, you'll quite quickly discover that they can be applied to a lot of other things:
    Roleplaying a pre-made character? You do that in Monkey Island too, and that's an adventure game.
    Roleplaying a character of your own making, wrt species, sex, etc.? You do that in Unreal Tournament, and that's a pure FPS, and a certain set of older tactical squad games.
    Making your character have their own major/minor choices in the storyline? See again, various adventure games.
    Only one character? Well sure, but most FPSes had that too.
    A group of characters? Hi, X-COM, etc..
    Level ups? See pretty much every FPS since CoD4 (maybe even before), and a lot of games have had the same systems of in-game progression under a different guise (money = XP, is GTA an RPG?).
    Assigning stats and picking abilities? Not that different from picking Perks in FPSes, or various ability upgrades in a whole host of RTSes.

    Likewise, most distinctions that people make of RPGs, you can look at various RPGs, casual or otherwise, and find exceptions. This applies to those who would make that argument that it's only when a combination of particular criteria are met that you get an RPG.

    There's really no much mechanical difference between making enough cash in-game in Counter-Strike to purchase an AWP, and making enough experience in Baldur's Gate 2 to level up and picking Lightning Bolt.

    RPG is basically a bad identifier, along with Adventure Game and a few others.

    Real-Time Strategy
    Turn-Based Strategy
    First Person Shooter
    Third Person Shooter

    etc. are good identifiers. They describe the core mechanics of the game. An FPS won't stop being an FPS and something that doesn't involve shooting from a first person perspective can't be an FPS. They were also historically very simple games, using only a few mechanics. Historically what we call RPGs have a lot of different mechanics involved in them, which is why we adopted a very broad stroke of an identifier. There are numerous different mechanic involved in RPGs; the stat assignment mechanic, the conversation mechanic, the inventory mechanic, often faction mechanics and so on.



    @Flippy_D I also think you've sabotaged your initial line of questioning slightly with rose-tinted goggles. You refer to Chrono Trigger and FF6, and then wonder why so many RPGs are irrelevant today. But it's really just cherry-picking. CT & FF6 are the Witcher 2s and Mass Effect 3s of yesteryear, but just because there are games like Ego Draconis and other RPGs that are (in market terms) 'irrelevant' today doesn't mean there weren't back then too; I'm sure if you dig through the archives of SNES games, you'll see a boatload of RPGs that fell by the wayside.

    bethryn.png
  • KadokenKadoken He's a dandy guy In SpaceRegistered User regular
    They became much more fun.

  • RainbowDespairRainbowDespair Registered User regular
    It's important to realize that the term, RPG, has evolved to mean something very different than the originating term, roleplaying game. Here's my definition of an RPG:

    RPG - A game where improving the capabilities of your hero or band of heroes, generally through LV-Ups and equipment, is the MOST important element of the gameplay.

    The "most" is the crucial part. Lots of games feature character capability improvement, but only in an RPG is it the most important part of gameplay. And of course, you also have hybrids where the RPG element is tied with some other aspect of gameplay for being the most important. For example, I'd classify games like Bioshock, Fallout 3, Borderlands, and Mass Effect as Shooter/RPGs. However, I wouldn't classify CoD as a Shooter/RPG because although it has RPG elements, the FPS elements are clearly much more important to the game.

  • SpoitSpoit *twitch twitch* Registered User regular
    I don't know, player skill seems like it's a lot more important than character skill in some of those games you mentioned. Bioshock in particular

    camo_sig2.png
  • BethrynBethryn Registered User regular
    However, I wouldn't classify CoD as a Shooter/RPG because although it has RPG elements, the FPS elements are clearly much more important to the game.
    Would you describe Counter-Strike as a Shooter/RPG?

    The money system (money awarded for kills and objectives is pretty relateable to XP for kills and quests) is a fairly core part of the game.
    Lots of games feature character capability improvement, but only in an RPG is it the most important part of gameplay.
    Unit abilities are super-important in RTSes.
    Character improvement is fairly important in a fair number of Adventure games (what's the difference between getting a prophylactic in Leisure Suit Larry that prevents you dying from AIDs, and getting a helmet in Icewind Dale that prevents you from getting critically hit?).

    There are a fair number of exceptions even to the 'most important' argument, imo.

    bethryn.png
  • RainbowDespairRainbowDespair Registered User regular
    Spoit wrote: »
    I don't know, player skill seems like it's a lot more important than character skill in some of those games you mentioned. Bioshock in particular

    Which is why I didn't say anything about player skill. I mean, player skill is the #1 most important thing to your success in Dark Souls but nobody would argue that it's not an RPG.

    Bioshock is a border case but on the other hand, most people consider System Shock 2 an RPG and there isn't THAT much of a difference between their gameplay.

  • SpoitSpoit *twitch twitch* Registered User regular
    OK let me revise my statement. That ice wrench thing aside, I don't think character skill really mattered at all in bioshock

    camo_sig2.png
  • DonnictonDonnicton Registered User regular
    I've posted it before and I'll post it again. There's a part of this video that basically summarizes Square Enix's apparent stance on the RPG today.



    Specifically, 2:49 to 3:10 I am referring to. (note: it has swear words, for all you sensitive ear types)

    PSN: Donnicton - Wii/3DS FC: 1633-4230-5354 - Steam: Donnicton
  • RainbowDespairRainbowDespair Registered User regular
    edited May 2012
    Bethryn wrote: »
    There are a fair number of exceptions even to the 'most important' argument, imo.

    Which is why arguing about genre definitions isn't a very productive use of time. I mean, you can argue about whether or not Pokemon & Xenoblade are JRPGs 'til the cows come home (my personal answers would be "Obviously" and "Not really") but regardless of what your decision ends up being, it doesn't change either game. That's time that could be much more effectively spent with questions like "What does game X do well? What could have been fixed or improved?"

    In the end, each person has their own feel for what an RPG is.

    But hey, if you'd like I could amend my earlier statement to include "and is not obviously more appropriately a member of another genre." :)

    RainbowDespair on
  • RainbowDespairRainbowDespair Registered User regular
    edited May 2012
    Spoit wrote: »
    OK let me revise my statement. That ice wrench thing aside, I don't think character skill really mattered at all in bioshock

    Sure it does. The gameplay changes drastically as you play through the game depending on how you choose to upgrade your character and which weapons you choose to upgrade.

    Main difference between System Shock 2 & Bioshock is that Bioshock is more streamlined. System Shock 2 had a bunch of stats and spells whereas Bioshock got rid of most of the stats and spells however, just like SS2, you can still create drastically different character builds with your choices and upgrades.

    RainbowDespair on
  • Ragnar DragonfyreRagnar Dragonfyre Registered User regular
    edited May 2012
    I almost wish that arguing "What" an RPG is or isn't was considered an infringeable offense. Seriously... COD isn't an RPG and you're acting like a goose for claiming otherwise.

    Ragnar Dragonfyre on
    steam_sig.png
  • DonnictonDonnicton Registered User regular
    I almost wish that arguing "What" an RPG is or isn't was considered an infringeable offense. Seriously... COD isn't an RPG and you're acting like a goose for claiming otherwise.

    "RPG Elements".















    :bz

    PSN: Donnicton - Wii/3DS FC: 1633-4230-5354 - Steam: Donnicton
  • CondimentsCondiments Registered User regular
    RPGs are fading because of the advent of ridiculous production values of other genres? Well, I don't know about anyone else, but I certainly didn't commit myself to 50+ hours of gameplay because the graphix looked nice. And last time I checked, 99% of videogame stories are still crap, its just developers can now throw millions of dollars on background explosions and effects ancillary to gameplay to hope you don't notice.

    The answer to this question is actually incredibly simple: production costs have rapidly outpaced the niche audiences that supported the RPG systems of old. All this 'hybridization' is merely an extension of this, as old cRPGs and turn based jRPGs won't pull the crazy numbers needed to make a profit. Personally I lament the loss of the good ol' RPGs like Betrayal at Krondor, Planescape: Torment, Shin Megami Tensei: Nocturne, etc. where I could get lost in their rules/systems and try to figure them out. Now its all homogenizing all specialty and variety into one great slop as to not offend anyone's sensibilities.

    At least I have good old games, and kickstarter funded cRPGs to look forward to.

  • RainbowDespairRainbowDespair Registered User regular
    I really don't think the RPG audience is as niche as some people think.

    Pokemon is one of the most popular game series of all time.
    There are literally tens of millions of people who are subscribed to MMORPGs.
    Even though it's one of the less popular entries, Final Fantasy XIII still sold over 6 million copies in less than half a year.

    And there are too many Action/RPG hybrids that have sold phenomenally to count...

    Also, I'd say that in many ways, the MOBA & TD genres are strange offshoots of RPGs.

  • SpoitSpoit *twitch twitch* Registered User regular
    Condiments wrote: »
    RPGs are fading because of the advent of ridiculous production values of other genres? Well, I don't know about anyone else, but I certainly didn't commit myself to 50+ hours of gameplay because the graphix looked nice. And last time I checked, 99% of videogame stories are still crap, its just developers can now throw millions of dollars on background explosions and effects ancillary to gameplay to hope you don't notice.

    The answer to this question is actually incredibly simple: production costs have rapidly outpaced the niche audiences that supported the RPG systems of old. All this 'hybridization' is merely an extension of this, as old cRPGs and turn based jRPGs won't pull the crazy numbers needed to make a profit. Personally I lament the loss of the good ol' RPGs like Betrayal at Krondor, Planescape: Torment, Shin Megami Tensei: Nocturne, etc. where I could get lost in their rules/systems and try to figure them out. Now its all homogenizing all specialty and variety into one great slop as to not offend anyone's sensibilities.

    At least I have good old games, and kickstarter funded cRPGs to look forward to.

    Except, in theory, a smaller budget would require smaller numbers in order to be profitable. Except the publishers don't care. There really aren't any real wRPG analogues to, say, atlus. So....hopefully kickstarter will help

    camo_sig2.png
  • ShadowhopeShadowhope Baa. Registered User regular
    It's important to realize that the term, RPG, has evolved to mean something very different than the originating term, roleplaying game. Here's my definition of an RPG:

    RPG - A game where improving the capabilities of your hero or band of heroes, generally through LV-Ups and equipment, is the MOST important element of the gameplay.

    The "most" is the crucial part. Lots of games feature character capability improvement, but only in an RPG is it the most important part of gameplay. And of course, you also have hybrids where the RPG element is tied with some other aspect of gameplay for being the most important. For example, I'd classify games like Bioshock, Fallout 3, Borderlands, and Mass Effect as Shooter/RPGs. However, I wouldn't classify CoD as a Shooter/RPG because although it has RPG elements, the FPS elements are clearly much more important to the game.

    I would define RPG as "A game intended to tell an interactive story, where decisions that the player(s) make influence the direction of the plot."

    To me, the ability to upgrade my weapons in Mass Effect has no bearing on whether the game is an RPG or not. The method used for combat in Mass Effect (a TPS) has no bearing on whether the game is an RPG or not. That my character levels-up has no bearing on whether it's an RPG or not - I don't think that you need to be able to level up in an RPG. To me, the thing that makes Mass Effect an RPG is that I can choose to punch out a reporter or just verbally demolish her. I can eliminate a potential alien threat, one that once brought the galaxy to its knees, or I can free it. I can choose to blow up a valuable but dangerous resource, or I can choose to use it despite the horrific things that occurred there and the dangers in trying to use the technology there. It's about choice. There's not always enough choice, and sometimes I feel that none of the choices are in character for the character that I'm role-playing as, but they're there.

    I realize that that's out of sync with what a lot of other people call an RPG, but what else can you call a game where you role play?

    To me, upgrading equipment, leveling up, clicking to attack, etc, those are just game play elements. They're tools used to create a game. I suppose I mentally divide up games into one of three categories. The first is the type where you run along a singular plot. While another person might use different character/unit builds, strategies, choose a different level order, etc, the plot of the game is the same. On the other end, you have games with minimal plot; they may have setting and objectives, but no real plot or storytelling. Most multiplayer games are like this. In the middle, you have the RPG, where you have a plot but some freedom in how to achieve it.

    These aren't always pure formats; in fact, most games exist somewhere on a spectrum. For example, Jedi Knight allowed you to go either Light Side or Dark Side, and see the game a little differently. Starcraft II's single player campaign could kill off characters, or not, depending on what missions were chosen. But having three choices in the entirety of the game isn't enough for me to classify it in my middle RPG category. So, I mentally lump Final Fantasy into the exact same box as Bulletstorm: they're both game series where the plot is essentially set in stone, and my range of options essentially boils down to "What sword/gun do I use?" Mass Effect 3 MP and Starcraft II MP get lumped together at the opposite end of the spectrum. In the middle, you have Skyrim and Mass Effect and Dragon Age and Deux Ex and other RPGs.

    I'm not entirely sure that the RPG is between the "set in stone narrative" and the "no narrative," but I definitely consider it to be distinct, and the RPG style of narrative handling is what makes a game an RPG for me.

  • Shenl742Shenl742 Registered User regular
    Well, I consider myself a big jRPG fan and I' haven't really had any problems finding good ones to play this generation. I don't know if that's just because I'm not tired of a lot of the genre's conventions, because I just have lower standards (I hope not), or...because I just take the time to look for them?

    I mean, from the sound of it, a lot of peoples issues with jRPGs boils down to "Well...I didn't like the last couple FFs". There's plenty more stuff out there in my opinion.

    FC: 1907-8030-1478
  • naengwennaengwen Registered User regular
    edited May 2012
    This thread got weird really fast. I wonder if it's possible to have a discussion about RPGs without it devolving into a discussion of what defines an RPG.

    In fact, maybe that's what's "wrong" with RPGs nowadays. Since nobody can give a straight answer, people just associate the term with games that sell poorly.

    Well, whatever. I stare at the stack of games to my left and can count 12 RPGs, 3 Action Adventures, 2 Survival Horrors, a Platformer, and a Rhythm game. Don't care if someone agrees with my definition, and until someone brings up some decisive common ground I haven't thought of, I won't care about theirs either.

    naengwen on
    VQnLrrE.jpg
  • Page-Page- Registered User regular
    I know there are still plenty of decent ones being released, especially on handhelds, but I'm still occasionally bewildered by how jrpg quality is measured. I remember getting Crimson Gem Saga because it was cheap and was getting consistently great reviews. And it's a completely forgettable game in every way. There is not a single interesting or notable thing about it. And as soon as I realized that I lost all interest and couldn't even finish it.

    Really, people? That game wouldn't even have cut the mustard on the snes.

    (Mostly) Competitive Gaming Blog Updated August 18th - Monster Hunting
    stream
  • GnomeTankGnomeTank Registered User regular
    Oh it's way more than the last few FF's. I can think of several this generation that were huge lemons in some way. I'll use Blue Dragon as an example. It was decent, but it didn't live up to the hype, the story was very meh, the game play was tired and the English track voice acting was horrible.

    I don't think we're all saying there were no good JRPG's this generation (Xenoblade alone proves this wrong), but that there have been some pretty serious high profile bleh games.

    Sagroth wrote: »
    Oh c'mon FyreWulff, no one's gonna pay to visit Uranus.
    Steam: Brainling, XBL / PSN: GnomeTank, NintendoID: Brainling, FF14: Zillius Rosh
  • Shenl742Shenl742 Registered User regular
    edited May 2012
    Can that many jRPG releases in the states outside of FF be considered "high profile" though, especially today? The vast majority of it's always been pretty niche in my mind

    And though I liked Blue Dragon...I think it can be shown as an example of when nostalgia backfires...

    Shenl742 on
    FC: 1907-8030-1478
  • SpoitSpoit *twitch twitch* Registered User regular
    Sure. Dragon quest, pokemon, etc

    camo_sig2.png
  • Shenl742Shenl742 Registered User regular
    edited May 2012
    Ah yes, of course...but wouldn't those count as successful? Don't think there are any others though. I'm sure Atlus USAs stuff sells enough to keep the lights on at least...

    Shenl742 on
    FC: 1907-8030-1478
  • DoctorArchDoctorArch Curmudgeon Registered User regular
    I can't help but think that the definition of "RPG" is the same as that classic definition for obscenity: "I know it when I see it."

    steam_sig.png
  • CondimentsCondiments Registered User regular
    Spoit wrote: »
    Condiments wrote: »
    RPGs are fading because of the advent of ridiculous production values of other genres? Well, I don't know about anyone else, but I certainly didn't commit myself to 50+ hours of gameplay because the graphix looked nice. And last time I checked, 99% of videogame stories are still crap, its just developers can now throw millions of dollars on background explosions and effects ancillary to gameplay to hope you don't notice.

    The answer to this question is actually incredibly simple: production costs have rapidly outpaced the niche audiences that supported the RPG systems of old. All this 'hybridization' is merely an extension of this, as old cRPGs and turn based jRPGs won't pull the crazy numbers needed to make a profit. Personally I lament the loss of the good ol' RPGs like Betrayal at Krondor, Planescape: Torment, Shin Megami Tensei: Nocturne, etc. where I could get lost in their rules/systems and try to figure them out. Now its all homogenizing all specialty and variety into one great slop as to not offend anyone's sensibilities.

    At least I have good old games, and kickstarter funded cRPGs to look forward to.

    Except, in theory, a smaller budget would require smaller numbers in order to be profitable. Except the publishers don't care. There really aren't any real wRPG analogues to, say, atlus. So....hopefully kickstarter will help

    Agreed. Even if Kickstarter isn't something that will reliably fund more traditional RPGs long term, the mere fact so many are willing to throw money at the IDEA of such games may open the way for more niche games again. In fact this might be happening already, with old school RPGs like Shadowrun, Wasteland 2, Dead State(..maybe), and Age of Decadence coming around in the corner in 2013. Publishers may open up the idea of funding these types of games if demand is shown through the success of such games. So yeah, we need more companies like Atlus around.

    On a side note I think the continued developments of more 'pure' genres like older computer RPGS, jRPGs, and Adventure games are integral to the continued development of this medium. Gaming's evolution can't be simply tied to the hybridization of genres as things will only develop along certain paths, leaving other ENTIRE GAMEPLAY STYLES in the dust(turn based RPG, RTwP, etc). This creates a self-fulfilling scenario of certain genres/formats seeming old and outdated simply because they haven't seen the multiple years of development and refinement more popular gameplay types would have. This also creates an environment where newer players won't be exposed to more abstract, less action type games making it less likely for the continued survival of the genre. Plus, its only beneficial for these types of games to be created, as advancements/innovations would eventually trickle down into hybrid games.

    Sorry for the rant, just something that has bothered me about games the past few years.

  • naengwennaengwen Registered User regular
    edited May 2012
    Shenl742 wrote: »
    Ah yes, of course...but wouldn't those count as successful?

    Mistwalker fits as a high profile RPG maker, along with Level 5. Least in Japan, their games were pretty big deals, and the level of marketing for games like White Knight Chronicles, Lost Odyssey, Last Remnant, and Blue Dragon suggests they were bringing that to the states as well. Likewise, there were several high profile JRPGs from guys like Namco, Atlus and Mistwalker that never hit the states this generation that people would've gone nuts for. hell, if they released Xenoblade in the States during Nintendo's "hardcore comeback" marketing spree a year or two ago, this conversation would probably just be focused on where Square Enix went wrong in their console lineup. Then a mod would have pointed at the video games industry thread, and locked this one before Pokemon's status as an RPG was brought into question.
    DoctorArch wrote: »
    I can't help but think that the definition of "RPG" is the same as that classic definition for obscenity: "I know it when I see it."

    Pretty much, it's a definition by association. We know what an RPG experience is, because we've played games that are RPGs by assertion, and associate the genre with games that are like those games. We can't just say that an RPG is "like Ultima" or "like Dungeons and Dragons" though, so we go back and dissect those RPGs to justify the assertion. Then it all goes boom as associations with other genres clash, at which point someone says "fuck it, guys, just turn on the system and let's play some Crystal Chronicles."

    naengwen on
    VQnLrrE.jpg
  • RainbowDespairRainbowDespair Registered User regular
    edited May 2012
    In the US, the most successful new JRPG IP in the past few years is probably Lost Odyssey. It sold 200k+ in its first month and about 350k in its first year.

    Dark Souls sold really well and Xenoblade probably did decently (we'll see in a week or two when the NPD report comes out) but neither of those is a traditional JRPG.

    IMO, the last truly great traditional JRPG was Persona 4 in 2008. There have been several great RPGs from Japan since then (Dark Souls, Xenoblade, Tales of Graces F, Valkyria Chronicles) but none of them has really fit the "pure" JRPG mold.

    RainbowDespair on
  • mrt144mrt144 King of the Numbernames Registered User regular
    thread needs to be retitled to "whatever happened to the JRPG, because we honestly aren't talking about anything that isn't a JRPG"

  • JarsJars Registered User regular
    edited May 2012
    radiant historia came out in 2011 and completely sold out, but that's an atlus release so that means they sold like 10 units

    Jars on
  • naengwennaengwen Registered User regular
    mrt144 wrote: »
    thread needs to be retitled to "whatever happened to the JRPG, because we honestly aren't talking about anything that isn't a JRPG"

    Western RPGs are fine, they've got massive effects

    VQnLrrE.jpg
  • SpoitSpoit *twitch twitch* Registered User regular
    edited May 2012
    mrt144 wrote: »
    thread needs to be retitled to "whatever happened to the JRPG, because we honestly aren't talking about anything that isn't a JRPG"
    Sure we were. We just moved on a bit because everyone is tired of arguing about ME3. I mean, it's not like all these discussion points about C&C are a thing that exists in jRPGs

    EDIT: err... DA2. naengwen confused me.

    Spoit on
    camo_sig2.png
Sign In or Register to comment.