Japanese games and art don't go in for OMFGREALISM in the same way that America's does.
Why?
Japanese gaming culture came from arcades, whereas (IMO) American gaming culture came from the PC. You'll always be able to find examples that disprove the rule, of course, but that's my take. Playing arcade games has always been more socially acceptable in Japan than in America. Hell, we don't even put arcade games (for kids) anwhere near our slots (gambling for adults), which goes to show you how segmented our market is. Arcade games prize the same things as slot machines -- a succinct, addicting experience with pop colors and a 'test your skill' element. The PC experience is all about a deep, customizable, 'realistic' game.
Blah blah blah, I know that's way too broad, but it's how I think of the differences. You can still see the difference between Splinter Cell and Metal Gear. Metal Gear has more colors, more 'representative' icons (the famous !), more things that break the 4th wall. Splinter Cell goes for hollywood realism in game form.
A ton of western games are stylized and/or cartoony.
Japanese games are overwhelmingly anime styled though, with notable exceptions (nintendo games, for example)
No, there's crafting, socialization, some story elements, and a bunch of other shit. You might as well call every RPG a grindfest then.
WoW is not a "grindfest," which traditionally means that leveling up takes an obsessive and excessive long time. Which it doesn't. Therefore it's not a grindfest. QED.
Good RPGs do not have grinding because levels are just a carry over from the pen and paper games. In a well done RPG, such as Bloodlines, there is zero grinding.
MMORPGs are about two things: grinding and being a graphical chat program. The latter is probably why its so damn hard to quit, you miss the social aspect. You are right that its there, but I really wouldn't consider sitting around the hub and chatting with people as "gameplay".
And if the old PvP honour grind wasn't "obsessive" and "excessive", I don't know what is.
Which is one aspect of the game. A majority of the people I know completely ignore PvP in favor of PvE. And PvE isn't a grind at all. That's all I'm saying.
You're saying "all it is is a grindfest" and I disagree.
And I disagree that "good RPGs do not have grinding." Some good RPGs have the occasional flaw. An RPG that just grants you EXP whenever you need it feels way too linear to me. I'd say a good RPG doesn't scale your character's progress 1:1 with his need. There should be some imbalance in the game otherwise it's a boring RPG.
Well, I should have put in some qualifiers there, true. Bloodlines is an unusual example, most RPGs have a bit of it, but no where near the amount that an MMO has.
Once I realised that I hated grinding in wow, I was pretty much limited to pvp/arena only. And there isn't much variation there. Also, my character was always broke.
And really, I don't even think WoW is a bad game. I just played it too much and realised I hated what the main focus was.
I guess it's just that EQ1 soured me on the idea of grinding. I mean I played for four years and never hit max level on any of my characters. I also LOST FOUR LEVELS IN THREE HOURS once by dying 12 times just trying to get to my body. That's right. I spent THREE HOURSLOSING EXPERIENCEAND LEVELS. That's three hours of frustration, of not actually "playing" and of making NEGATIVE progress, or "regress" in the game. And you know what? A week later I fucking ground those levels back.
So, yeah. It's hard for me to call something like WoW a "grindfest" after that, even though it may seem like one to others. It's all a matter of perspective I suppose.
People, people. Before you can debate grinding you have to define it. As far as I'm aware, the most normal definition is engaging in combat outside of what you would come across anyway by advancing through the game. If in the process of moving from point A to point B you gain enough experience to handle the enemies at point B then grinding never came into it.
If you feel the need to grind by this definition in most modern JRPGs then you clearly suck at them. Hell, I've come across a fair few where low level runs are the only way to get any sort of real difficulty out of them.
I can't speak for WoW seeing as I've never played it but there seems to be some confusion on the matter of what the term grinding really means going on here.
People, people. Before you can debate grinding you have to define it. As far as I'm aware, the most normal definition is engaging in combat outside of what you would come across anyway by advancing through the game. If in the process of moving from point A to point B you gain enough experience to handle the enemies at point B then grinding never came into it.
If you feel the need to grind by this definition in most modern JRPGs then you clearly suck at them. Hell, I've come across a fair few where low level runs are the only way to get any sort of real difficulty out of them.
I can't speak for WoW seeing as I've never played it but there seems to be some confusion on the matter of what the term grinding really means going on here.
I think only one person brought up grinding in Japanese RPGs.
And really, its inaccurate. Grinding is a staple of Korean RPGs.
Sure, Japanese RPGs get alot of flak for lack of innovation over the years, but they aren't grindfests per se.
Japanese games and art don't go in for OMFGREALISM in the same way that America's does.
Why?
Japanese gaming culture came from arcades, whereas (IMO) American gaming culture came from the PC. You'll always be able to find examples that disprove the rule, of course, but that's my take. Playing arcade games has always been more socially acceptable in Japan than in America. Hell, we don't even put arcade games (for kids) anwhere near our slots (gambling for adults), which goes to show you how segmented our market is. Arcade games prize the same things as slot machines -- a succinct, addicting experience with pop colors and a 'test your skill' element. The PC experience is all about a deep, customizable, 'realistic' game.
Blah blah blah, I know that's way too broad, but it's how I think of the differences. You can still see the difference between Splinter Cell and Metal Gear. Metal Gear has more colors, more 'representative' icons (the famous !), more things that break the 4th wall. Splinter Cell goes for hollywood realism in game form.
A ton of western games are stylized and/or cartoony.
Japanese games are overwhelmingly anime styled though, with notable exceptions (nintendo games, for example)
I think that the styles have been mixing quite a bit over the last 10 years. But you can still see how different developers came up in one style or another.
RedShell on
Homing In Imperfectly?
Pokemans D/P: 1289 4685 0522
People, people. Before you can debate grinding you have to define it. As far as I'm aware, the most normal definition is engaging in combat outside of what you would come across anyway by advancing through the game. If in the process of moving from point A to point B you gain enough experience to handle the enemies at point B then grinding never came into it.
If you feel the need to grind by this definition in most modern JRPGs then you clearly suck at them. Hell, I've come across a fair few where low level runs are the only way to get any sort of real difficulty out of them.
I can't speak for WoW seeing as I've never played it but there seems to be some confusion on the matter of what the term grinding really means going on here.
Then, by virtue of this definition, a game whose purpose is, primarily, to acquire experience cannot be a "grind" as point A is a position of less experience and point B is a position of more experience and thus any path taken from these two points will undoubtedly require combat. No combat can be deemed ancillary, unnecessary, or even extra as the point is to acquire experience.
Drez on
Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
0
Options
INeedNoSaltwith blood on my teethRegistered Userregular
Aren't there not-ugly examples of American robot desgin? I'm no huge anime fan, but I'd hate to think that Battletech's walking shoeboxes are representative of American giant robot design.
Not that I can think of any other examples.
I quite like them, the design looks much more realistic
Fixed.
If you ignore physics, yes. Battletech plays at being "real military looking" while being just as over-the-top as something like Gundam.
It would be stupid to use either in any sort of military setting, except that anime mechs tend to have super-science or "magical" interfaces with drivers, and thus explain away the realities of how retarded a giant bipedal tank is. Battletech looks ugly in pretending to be more hard sci-fi, but still doesn't make any damn sense. I guess that's the problem I've had with it.
Mechwarriors have neural interfaces with their 'mechs, too.
People, people. Before you can debate grinding you have to define it. As far as I'm aware, the most normal definition is engaging in combat outside of what you would come across anyway by advancing through the game. If in the process of moving from point A to point B you gain enough experience to handle the enemies at point B then grinding never came into it.
If you feel the need to grind by this definition in most modern JRPGs then you clearly suck at them. Hell, I've come across a fair few where low level runs are the only way to get any sort of real difficulty out of them.
I can't speak for WoW seeing as I've never played it but there seems to be some confusion on the matter of what the term grinding really means going on here.
Then, by virtue of this definition, a game whose purpose is, primarily, to acquire experience cannot be a "grind" as point A is a position of less experience and point B is a position of more experience and thus any path taken from these two points will undoubtedly require combat. No combat can be deemed ancillary, unnecessary, or even extra as the point is to acquire experience.
That's taking what I said a little literally, I was making the unstated assumption that combat occurred in the process of completing some other task. If there is literally nothing to a game but running round in circles fighting things for the sake of leveling up, then yeah that would be a grind and that game (probably) sucks. For the record, I've never played it for more than a few hours so I could be somehow off base but I don't count Diablo 2 a grind because while the gameplay consists of nothing but fighting, you are always on your way to somewhere while doing so and the enemies don't even respawn, making it pretty much impossible to grind.
People, people. Before you can debate grinding you have to define it. As far as I'm aware, the most normal definition is engaging in combat outside of what you would come across anyway by advancing through the game. If in the process of moving from point A to point B you gain enough experience to handle the enemies at point B then grinding never came into it.
If you feel the need to grind by this definition in most modern JRPGs then you clearly suck at them. Hell, I've come across a fair few where low level runs are the only way to get any sort of real difficulty out of them.
I can't speak for WoW seeing as I've never played it but there seems to be some confusion on the matter of what the term grinding really means going on here.
Then, by virtue of this definition, a game whose purpose is, primarily, to acquire experience cannot be a "grind" as point A is a position of less experience and point B is a position of more experience and thus any path taken from these two points will undoubtedly require combat. No combat can be deemed ancillary, unnecessary, or even extra as the point is to acquire experience.
That's taking what I said a little literally, I was making the unstated assumption that combat occurred in the process of completing some other task. If there is literally nothing to a game but running round in circles fighting things for the sake of leveling up, then yeah that would be a grind and that game (probably) sucks. For the record, I've never played it for more than a few hours so I could be somehow off base but I don't count Diablo 2 a grind because while the gameplay consists of nothing but fighting, you are always on your way to somewhere while doing so and the enemies don't even respawn, making it pretty much impossible to grind.
Sorry, you can't have it both ways. I was originally discussing the colloquial meaning of "grind" which is "EXCESSIVE extraneous leveling/combat" and you came in with your "people, people" post and the literal definition of "grind".
You can't have your cake and eat it too. Either we both use the literal definition and I'm right or we both use the colloquial definition and I'm right. Either way, I'm right, and you can take your condescending pedantry somewhere else next time.
Drez on
Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
0
Options
Magus`The fun has been DOUBLED!Registered Userregular
edited September 2007
Also, the Japanese taste like chicken while Americans are more of a beef flavour.
People, people. Before you can debate grinding you have to define it. As far as I'm aware, the most normal definition is engaging in combat outside of what you would come across anyway by advancing through the game. If in the process of moving from point A to point B you gain enough experience to handle the enemies at point B then grinding never came into it.
If you feel the need to grind by this definition in most modern JRPGs then you clearly suck at them. Hell, I've come across a fair few where low level runs are the only way to get any sort of real difficulty out of them.
I can't speak for WoW seeing as I've never played it but there seems to be some confusion on the matter of what the term grinding really means going on here.
Then, by virtue of this definition, a game whose purpose is, primarily, to acquire experience cannot be a "grind" as point A is a position of less experience and point B is a position of more experience and thus any path taken from these two points will undoubtedly require combat. No combat can be deemed ancillary, unnecessary, or even extra as the point is to acquire experience.
That's taking what I said a little literally, I was making the unstated assumption that combat occurred in the process of completing some other task. If there is literally nothing to a game but running round in circles fighting things for the sake of leveling up, then yeah that would be a grind and that game (probably) sucks. For the record, I've never played it for more than a few hours so I could be somehow off base but I don't count Diablo 2 a grind because while the gameplay consists of nothing but fighting, you are always on your way to somewhere while doing so and the enemies don't even respawn, making it pretty much impossible to grind.
Sorry, you can't have it both ways. I was originally discussing the colloquial meaning of "grind" which is "EXCESSIVE extraneous leveling/combat" and you came in with your "people, people" post and the literal definition of "grind".
You can't have your cake and eat it too. Either we both use the literal definition and I'm right or we both use the colloquial definition and I'm right. Either way, I'm right, and you can take your condescending pedantry somewhere else next time.
Bah, my wording is probably far too loose. Basically I was trying to support what I think was your side of the argument because some people here seem to have a definition of the term whereby any game that features leveling and has a lot of combat is automatically a grind-fest. I can't think of words that you couldn't poke a hole in if you really tried to that sum up the meaning of the term completely, maybe that's why we have a term in the first place? I was merely trying to lay down a firmer definition because people seem to not realise they have different ideas of what grinding actually is.
People, people. Before you can debate grinding you have to define it. As far as I'm aware, the most normal definition is engaging in combat outside of what you would come across anyway by advancing through the game. If in the process of moving from point A to point B you gain enough experience to handle the enemies at point B then grinding never came into it.
If you feel the need to grind by this definition in most modern JRPGs then you clearly suck at them. Hell, I've come across a fair few where low level runs are the only way to get any sort of real difficulty out of them.
I can't speak for WoW seeing as I've never played it but there seems to be some confusion on the matter of what the term grinding really means going on here.
Then, by virtue of this definition, a game whose purpose is, primarily, to acquire experience cannot be a "grind" as point A is a position of less experience and point B is a position of more experience and thus any path taken from these two points will undoubtedly require combat. No combat can be deemed ancillary, unnecessary, or even extra as the point is to acquire experience.
That's taking what I said a little literally, I was making the unstated assumption that combat occurred in the process of completing some other task. If there is literally nothing to a game but running round in circles fighting things for the sake of leveling up, then yeah that would be a grind and that game (probably) sucks. For the record, I've never played it for more than a few hours so I could be somehow off base but I don't count Diablo 2 a grind because while the gameplay consists of nothing but fighting, you are always on your way to somewhere while doing so and the enemies don't even respawn, making it pretty much impossible to grind.
Sorry, you can't have it both ways. I was originally discussing the colloquial meaning of "grind" which is "EXCESSIVE extraneous leveling/combat" and you came in with your "people, people" post and the literal definition of "grind".
You can't have your cake and eat it too. Either we both use the literal definition and I'm right or we both use the colloquial definition and I'm right. Either way, I'm right, and you can take your condescending pedantry somewhere else next time.
Bah, my wording is probably far too loose. Basically I was trying to support what I think was you're side of the arguement because some people here seem to have a definition of the term whereby any game that features leveling and has a lot of combat is automatically a grind-fest. I can't think of words that you couldn't poke a hole in if you really tried to sum up the meaning of the term completely, maybe that's why we have a term in the first place? I was merely trying to lay down a firmer definition because people seem to not realise they have different ideas of what grinding actually is.
I wonder why the japanese get motion sickness from FPSes
is it because they are infearior? eye shape?
I get motion sickness from FPS do you want to fight?
Anyways guys how come none of you have talked about ____ Training games and non-games that are so popular in Japan right now? Also why didn't Brain Training sell in the US? Is it because we Americans believe we are at the very highest peak of intelligence and so we do not need it? Also why isn't the 360 doing well in Japan, are they xenophobic against gaijin technology?
The big difference though is that the writing for the V.Novels and hybrids tends to be abso-fucking-lutely amazing compared to almost anything the US has crapped out in the last decade.
I've always wondered why Japanese games or even anime usually have white characters. Does anyone else think this or am I just assuming incorrectly?
I know there are Japanese characters and such, but it seems like there are a lot of American/European style characters from such a (traditionally) xenophobic nation.
jb7 on
0
Options
INeedNoSaltwith blood on my teethRegistered Userregular
The big difference though is that the writing for the V.Novels and hybrids tends to be abso-fucking-lutely amazing compared to almost anything the US has crapped out in the last decade.
w
w
w
what
you didn't
gah
I can only imagine that this is some sort of attempt to communicate Bioshock or Torment as a literary masterpiece. If such is a case, then I highly suggest picking up Ever17 so you can see about where the baseline is for the popular stuff... and Ever17 wasn't even particularly noteworthy in Japan (popular, but not notably so) as far as v.novels go. It's only uphill from there.
The big difference though is that the writing for the V.Novels and hybrids tends to be abso-fucking-lutely amazing compared to almost anything the US has crapped out in the last decade.
w
w
w
what
you didn't
gah
This sort of discussion is about general trends by it's very nature. Can you honestly give more than a handful of anomalous counter-examples given that I'm pretty sure Aroduc specified that he was talking about the visual novels that actually try to be good as opposed to the porn for porn's sake ones.
Every fucking adventure game ever? A large amount of RPGs?
The big difference though is that the writing for the V.Novels and hybrids tends to be abso-fucking-lutely amazing compared to almost anything the US has crapped out in the last decade.
w
w
w
what
you didn't
gah
I can only imagine that this is some sort of attempt to communicate Bioshock or Torment as a literary masterpiece. If such is a case, then I highly suggest picking up Ever17 so you can see about where the baseline is for the popular stuff... and Ever17 wasn't even particularly noteworthy in Japan (popular, but not notably so) as far as v.novels go. It's only uphill from there.
Wait, just writing in video games, or writing in general? The former could be construed as a matter of taste I suppose, but the latter? Uggghh.
The big difference though is that the writing for the V.Novels and hybrids tends to be abso-fucking-lutely amazing compared to almost anything the US has crapped out in the last decade.
w
w
w
what
you didn't
gah
I can only imagine that this is some sort of attempt to communicate Bioshock or Torment as a literary masterpiece. If such is a case, then I highly suggest picking up Ever17 so you can see about where the baseline is for the popular stuff... and Ever17 wasn't even particularly noteworthy in Japan (popular, but not notably so) as far as v.novels go. It's only uphill from there.
Aroduc you did not specify visual novels or games. You said "anything". I mistook your meaning.
Edit: As for videogames as "literary masterpieces", I hold the opinion that there has never been any videogame that rivals a great book.
Anonymous Robot on
Sigs shouldn't be higher than 80 pixels - Elki.
0
Options
INeedNoSaltwith blood on my teethRegistered Userregular
edited September 2007
I guess it's easy to have awesome stories when your games are stories first and games second?
The big difference though is that the writing for the V.Novels and hybrids tends to be abso-fucking-lutely amazing compared to almost anything the US has crapped out in the last decade.
w
w
w
what
you didn't
gah
I can only imagine that this is some sort of attempt to communicate Bioshock or Torment as a literary masterpiece. If such is a case, then I highly suggest picking up Ever17 so you can see about where the baseline is for the popular stuff... and Ever17 wasn't even particularly noteworthy in Japan (popular, but not notably so) as far as v.novels go. It's only uphill from there.
Shouldn't these v.novels be compared with regular novels, or at the very least, comics? Since they are just pictures on screen with most of it being text.
I can only imagine that this is some sort of attempt to communicate Bioshock or Torment as a literary masterpiece. If such is a case, then I highly suggest picking up Ever17 so you can see about where the baseline is for the popular stuff... and Ever17 wasn't even particularly noteworthy in Japan (popular, but not notably so) as far as v.novels go. It's only uphill from there.
Based on your avatar and sig, I think it'll be easier for us to just assume you have terrible taste.
The big difference though is that the writing for the V.Novels and hybrids tends to be abso-fucking-lutely amazing compared to almost anything the US has crapped out in the last decade.
w
w
w
what
you didn't
gah
I can only imagine that this is some sort of attempt to communicate Bioshock or Torment as a literary masterpiece. If such is a case, then I highly suggest picking up Ever17 so you can see about where the baseline is for the popular stuff... and Ever17 wasn't even particularly noteworthy in Japan (popular, but not notably so) as far as v.novels go. It's only uphill from there.
Shouldn't these v.novels be compared with regular novels, or at the very least, comics? Since they are just pictures on screen with most of it being text.
edit: dammit, everyone jumped on that one.
You could just about push for interactive fiction, maybe, but v.novels are far more mainstream in Japan than IF is elsewhere.
I guess it's easy to have awesome stories when your games are stories first and games second?
That's pretty much it.
A collection of storyboards is not a fucking videogame.
One thing I've always found interesting is that many people complain about JRPGs is their linear nature, when it's more of an emphasis on telling a specific story, rather than immersion. Is there something wrong with telling a story in that manner?
I guess it's easy to have awesome stories when your games are stories first and games second?
That's pretty much it.
A collection of storyboards is not a fucking videogame.
One thing I've always found interesting is that many people complain about JRPGs is their linear nature, when it's more of an emphasis on telling a specific story, rather than immersion. Is there something wrong with telling a story in that manner?
I don't think there is anything wrong with it and they are definitely games. With v. novels, they are choose your own adventure books at best.
I guess it's easy to have awesome stories when your games are stories first and games second?
That's pretty much it.
A collection of storyboards is not a fucking videogame.
One thing I've always found interesting is that many people complain about JRPGs is their linear nature, when it's more of an emphasis on telling a specific story, rather than immersion. Is there something wrong with telling a story in that manner?
Well the linearity in JRPGS extends beyond the plot to the gameplay. This is the main complaint. Most Western RPGS also have an incredibly linear story, even ones that promote 'choice' still end up exactly the same more or less, such as kotors or fables.
I guess it's easy to have awesome stories when your games are stories first and games second?
That's pretty much it.
A collection of storyboards is not a fucking videogame.
One thing I've always found interesting is that many people complain about JRPGs is their linear nature, when it's more of an emphasis on telling a specific story, rather than immersion. Is there something wrong with telling a story in that manner?
Nope. But a literal collection of storyboards does not a video game make.
Drez on
Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
0
Options
INeedNoSaltwith blood on my teethRegistered Userregular
I guess it's easy to have awesome stories when your games are stories first and games second?
That's pretty much it.
A collection of storyboards is not a fucking videogame.
One thing I've always found interesting is that many people complain about JRPGs is their linear nature, when it's more of an emphasis on telling a specific story, rather than immersion. Is there something wrong with telling a story in that manner?
No, but I don't think anyone's saying that.
I'd honestly just watch a movie than play most JRPGs, though, because the few I've played (or watched, as is the case generally), the gameplay really didn't seem noteworthy and just got in the way of advancing the story (in my opinion.)
Posts
A ton of western games are stylized and/or cartoony.
Japanese games are overwhelmingly anime styled though, with notable exceptions (nintendo games, for example)
I guess it's just that EQ1 soured me on the idea of grinding. I mean I played for four years and never hit max level on any of my characters. I also LOST FOUR LEVELS IN THREE HOURS once by dying 12 times just trying to get to my body. That's right. I spent THREE HOURS LOSING EXPERIENCE AND LEVELS. That's three hours of frustration, of not actually "playing" and of making NEGATIVE progress, or "regress" in the game. And you know what? A week later I fucking ground those levels back.
So, yeah. It's hard for me to call something like WoW a "grindfest" after that, even though it may seem like one to others. It's all a matter of perspective I suppose.
If you feel the need to grind by this definition in most modern JRPGs then you clearly suck at them. Hell, I've come across a fair few where low level runs are the only way to get any sort of real difficulty out of them.
I can't speak for WoW seeing as I've never played it but there seems to be some confusion on the matter of what the term grinding really means going on here.
I think only one person brought up grinding in Japanese RPGs.
And really, its inaccurate. Grinding is a staple of Korean RPGs.
Sure, Japanese RPGs get alot of flak for lack of innovation over the years, but they aren't grindfests per se.
Pokemans D/P: 1289 4685 0522
Then, by virtue of this definition, a game whose purpose is, primarily, to acquire experience cannot be a "grind" as point A is a position of less experience and point B is a position of more experience and thus any path taken from these two points will undoubtedly require combat. No combat can be deemed ancillary, unnecessary, or even extra as the point is to acquire experience.
Mechwarriors have neural interfaces with their 'mechs, too.
That's taking what I said a little literally, I was making the unstated assumption that combat occurred in the process of completing some other task. If there is literally nothing to a game but running round in circles fighting things for the sake of leveling up, then yeah that would be a grind and that game (probably) sucks. For the record, I've never played it for more than a few hours so I could be somehow off base but I don't count Diablo 2 a grind because while the gameplay consists of nothing but fighting, you are always on your way to somewhere while doing so and the enemies don't even respawn, making it pretty much impossible to grind.
Sorry, you can't have it both ways. I was originally discussing the colloquial meaning of "grind" which is "EXCESSIVE extraneous leveling/combat" and you came in with your "people, people" post and the literal definition of "grind".
You can't have your cake and eat it too. Either we both use the literal definition and I'm right or we both use the colloquial definition and I'm right. Either way, I'm right, and you can take your condescending pedantry somewhere else next time.
Steam Profile | Signature art by Alexandra 'Lexxy' Douglass
Bah, my wording is probably far too loose. Basically I was trying to support what I think was your side of the argument because some people here seem to have a definition of the term whereby any game that features leveling and has a lot of combat is automatically a grind-fest. I can't think of words that you couldn't poke a hole in if you really tried to that sum up the meaning of the term completely, maybe that's why we have a term in the first place? I was merely trying to lay down a firmer definition because people seem to not realise they have different ideas of what grinding actually is.
you know what really grinds my gears?
Er, alright. Let's just drop it then. :P
I get motion sickness from FPS do you want to fight?
Anyways guys how come none of you have talked about ____ Training games and non-games that are so popular in Japan right now? Also why didn't Brain Training sell in the US? Is it because we Americans believe we are at the very highest peak of intelligence and so we do not need it? Also why isn't the 360 doing well in Japan, are they xenophobic against gaijin technology?
This world is full of mysteries.
w
w
w
what
you didn't
gah
I know there are Japanese characters and such, but it seems like there are a lot of American/European style characters from such a (traditionally) xenophobic nation.
I've always assumed their games usually have Japanese characters.
I can only imagine that this is some sort of attempt to communicate Bioshock or Torment as a literary masterpiece. If such is a case, then I highly suggest picking up Ever17 so you can see about where the baseline is for the popular stuff... and Ever17 wasn't even particularly noteworthy in Japan (popular, but not notably so) as far as v.novels go. It's only uphill from there.
Every fucking adventure game ever? A large amount of RPGs?
Wait, just writing in video games, or writing in general? The former could be construed as a matter of taste I suppose, but the latter? Uggghh.
Edit: Oh, just games.
Aroduc you did not specify visual novels or games. You said "anything". I mistook your meaning.
Edit: As for videogames as "literary masterpieces", I hold the opinion that there has never been any videogame that rivals a great book.
I agree with this.
Shouldn't these v.novels be compared with regular novels, or at the very least, comics? Since they are just pictures on screen with most of it being text.
edit: dammit, everyone jumped on that one.
You could just about push for interactive fiction, maybe, but v.novels are far more mainstream in Japan than IF is elsewhere.
That's pretty much it.
A collection of storyboards is not a fucking videogame.
Even the old adventure games at least had completely retarded puzzles that made no sense.
Personally, I wouldn't mind if Japan would invade the U.S, if it meant I could get my hands on anime easier...
The fact that I can't be certain about the fact that you're joking is one of the most tragic things ever.
http://www.audioentropy.com/
It's true, all forms of Japanese media are superior. Their animated films are certainly the most important think to happen, culturally this century.
Fucking bakas.....
...
. . .
http://www.audioentropy.com/
I don't think there is anything wrong with it and they are definitely games. With v. novels, they are choose your own adventure books at best.
What? I'd like you to show me something that matches their skillful combination of art and eroticism.
Something like X-Change is as good as, if not better than any shitty Bergman film that Western culture shits out...
Well the linearity in JRPGS extends beyond the plot to the gameplay. This is the main complaint. Most Western RPGS also have an incredibly linear story, even ones that promote 'choice' still end up exactly the same more or less, such as kotors or fables.
Nope. But a literal collection of storyboards does not a video game make.
No, but I don't think anyone's saying that.
I'd honestly just watch a movie than play most JRPGs, though, because the few I've played (or watched, as is the case generally), the gameplay really didn't seem noteworthy and just got in the way of advancing the story (in my opinion.)