Printable View
Just for reference sake, you're not actually trying to convince people they no longer need (J)RPGs, and to look to shorter more action-movie-oriented games for their video gaming fixes, right? You're just begging the questions, genuinely curious, and just wanting to have a healthy debate, correct? I get the impression some people feel you are trying to persuade. And I don't imagine that you are
Edit: @WK
Fair enough. Thanks for pointing out my mistake. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth
See it's the last part that I think has everyone worried. On the brightside, the PS4 is doing better than its predecessor but on the downside, XV still sounds to be a few years away and the long development time is probably making this project far more expensive than SE would like it. I mean we are talking about the same company who sunk their MMO by making hi-res flowerpots. SE has not done a lot this past generation to garner consumer confidence.Quote:
I am actually sure that FFXV will boom the problem is that it now requires a new console again and that might keep the sales lower for a while than PS3 and XBox 360 would have done.
The other issue is that I came back from an RPG Panel I held at a pretty sizeable convention and found the utter lack of faith in FFXV by fans a bit of a sobering experience. :(
I am not persuading people to move away from JRPGs, I am instead trying to narrow down what they bring as a complete package. VeloZer0 caught on to my point about how JRPGs back in the day were largely known for their stories and characters but nowadays if you want good plot and characters you can go anywhere, it is no longer exclusive to the genre like it was in the 16-bit/32-bit days. So my question comes down to what else does the genre bring to the table for players? I mean if gamers only like it for the story and characters then why do you still come back to it when other genres have shown they can write just as competently? I am trying to get to some core to the JRPG experience I feel that people gloss over because we focus too much on one aspect and never really step back to look at the big picture. If you're here for plot and story only and everything else doesn't really matter, then why not just read the transcript or watch the cutscenes on YouTube? Why shell out $50 bucks if you're only going to lick the cream and throw away the cookie part of the JRPG Oreo? This is what I am getting at. I feel if we can find what the genre brings to players then we can figure out a solution to its problems, but some members argue there is no problem and others focus solely on one aspect without looking at the bigger picture, I am trying to guide the thread to this point of what makes a JRPG fun as a whole that makes it a unique experience from other games?Quote:
Originally Posted by Vyk
I have a love/hate relationship with RPGs. While I some times complain about all the random battles while trying to navigate a dungeon or whatever, I actually do enjoy the turn based battles that come with them. I like deciding what all my squad mates attacks are going to be and not having to be rushed when choosing. I like switching between physical attacks and magic attacks. Some time a summon animation is nice to watch. And I do enjoy the leveling up and experience points. If I'm really into a game I don't fret too much over the grinding. I'm not the best when it comes to strategy, but I still manage to get enjoyment out of the genre.
I also like the exploration. I'll take the time to look at each house and find new items. I like talking to NPCs and seeing what they say. A world doesn't have to be a sandbox for me to get the most out of it, provided there's enough there to see and explore. I don't always go on side-quests, but it's always nice to have the option. I also enjoy being able to name my characters and have different dialog options to choose from that prompt different responses from different people. The characters and story usually help to improve these elements, since why would I go from battle to battle if I don't care where the story is taking me? Why bother talking to NPCs if my characters have no personalities of their own to make interactions enjoyable?
The problem is I can also think of a couple of genres that offer me most of this, sans the turn based battling. But I could be mistaken on that last part. Naming your character isn't what it used to be either unless you're playing a game that has no voice acting.
I don't find "JRPG" to be a meaningful distinction, but "RPG" can mean a lot more. I want RPGs that provide immersive well-developed and fully-realized worlds, extensive opportunity for exploration, ideally thoughtful turn-based combat, and opportunities for my characters to grow and collect things.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno
I've stated the proof many times and it's yet to be overcome: how can JRPGs be on the decline when they've always been a niche genre outside of Final Fantasy and Pokemon?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno
There is an ongoing crisis for console development but that ecilpses JRPGs - it is almost impossible to create a lengthy experience that conforms with High Definition expectations without heavily recycling assets like Bethesda does, and even that is now taking them a concerningly long time to do. The spread of the cinematic game is not other genres "catching up;" it's literally all they have left in an era with astronomical costs and unprecedented publisher closures. It's created a culture where almost every game is a 10-20 hour experience with optional multiplayer, leading gamers to consume it in a single playthrough before selling it back to GameStop to buy the next one. This leads to lower game prices, which fuels larger backlogs, encouraging more single playthroughs and now the culture of consuming games like cigarettes is spiraling out of control, devaluing games on a whole and possibly suggesting a second crash. It makes me skeptical that people talk of the Japanese gaming industry declining whereas it's simply evolved to survive: you never hear of a Konami or Namco Bandai going out of business, whereas we lost Midway at the beginning of last generation and THQ at the end of it. I don't think people appreciate how alarming that is, especially with Microsoft and Nintendo both struggling to gain traction with their newest systems.
Because of pie! ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Bolivar
According to the ESA that keeps track of all of these funny stats and what-nots in the game industry back in 2004 RPGs accounted for 9% of console sales. Hell, RPGs have even ranked higher than Fighting and Drving games, which most people wouldn't consider a niche genre, several times the past decade.. In fact in 2006 RPG accounted for 9.5% of the console market which would have been the same year we saw KHII, FFXII, Suikoden V, MOTHER 3, Xenosaga Episode 3, and a few other JRPG goodies. Then it dipped to the 7-8% range until it plateaus to a measly 5.8% in 2009. FFXIII's release most likely helped it get knocked back up to 7.7% the following year which is important for a few reasons here, because it does prove you are right that the release of an FF title does boost sales for the genre, it also shows that despite outselling XII and being the fastest selling unit, it couldn't jump the sales back into the 9% range meaning those sales are not FF alone which means other games within the genre do have more significance meaning. While Pokemon and FF are certainly the heavy hitters, the genre's popularity doesn't begin or end with them. The genre slips back to 7.2% in 2011 most likely staying strong thanks to Skyrim, and then drops down to 6.5% in 2012 which quite frankly saw some great JRPGs that were mainly limited by platform, and it has finally climbed back up to 7% last year. Here's my issue with your "JRPGs are niche" answer, they had strong sales back in 2003 (fourth most popular genre), 2004 , and 2005. A genre that comes close to cornering almost 10% of the market isn't niche in my book. You want niche, go to rhythm games or visual novels, RPGs are a staple and back in the early 2000s JRPGs dominated the console market so you can't say it was WRPG picking up the slack cause they were having their own strong sales on the PC market.
An FF and Pokemon spike the sales but looking back to the early-mid 2000s and comparing them to more recent years we start seeing the genre slip, only peaking again when a release of Pokemon, FF, or with Skyrim and even then the peaks are not getting as high as they used to. We saw a steady rise in the genre between 2002-2006 and now its kind of been sporadic after that with the genre not hitting those 8-9% again since the incpetion of the previous console cycle (PS3, 360, Wii) in which the genre has since been struggling to not slip into niche status. While it is difficult to split up the difference of the charts from JRPG vs. WRPG I would still point out that compared to several more high profile genres like fighting games, racing, and pure adventure style games, RPGs are not a niche returning to the fringe shadows from which it came. Its obviously still a big market over here and its the JRPGs lack of quality or over-reliance on gimmicky mechanics which has allowed WRPGs to take them over in sales and popularity. Last gen really wasnt a strong generation for JRPGs, we could probably pull out a strong top ten but we would have to include all systems as none of them had any real dominance, whereas a top ten WRPG wouldn't be so difficult.
I don't disagree with your breakdown of the market model of gaming in general, but I don't feel it is to blame for the genre floundering since A) we were seeing this model hit full stride over ten years ago when, as I showed above, JRPGs were still strong contenders; and B) Most JRPGs from the PS2 era onward are not as long as people think they are and thus they can still work within the framework of the model. I mean beating FFX would take about 30 hours, even FFXII would probably be in the 40 hour range at best if all you are doing is the main campaign/slash story. That "over 100 hours of gameplay" nonsense comes from all the post-game/sidequest crap. Most of the JRPGs I can think of that would take over 50 hours just to complete the story portion are PS1 games like FFVII, VIII, Xenogears, and DQVII. So I feel JRPGs long ago adapted to the model. I still blame its fall in the West to both a shift towards disinterest in console RPGs in Japan brought upon by mobile gaming, as well as other genres shifting towards a heavier foruc on story telling, cinematics, and character development which stole one of the strengths of JRPGs while the genre struggled to figure out what to do with adapting their format to the market trends and new console specs while still being cost effective.Quote:
There is an ongoing crisis for console development but that ecilpses JRPGs - it is almost impossible to create a lengthy experience that conforms with High Definition expectations without heavily recycling assets like Bethesda does, and even that is now taking them a concerningly long time to do. The spread of the cinematic game is not other genres "catching up;" it's literally all they have left in an era with astronomical costs and unprecedented publisher closures. It's created a culture where almost every game is a 10-20 hour experience with optional multiplayer, leading gamers to consume it in a single playthrough before selling it back to GameStop to buy the next one. This leads to lower game prices, which fuels larger backlogs, encouraging more single playthroughs and now the culture of consuming games like cigarettes is spiraling out of control, devaluing games on a whole and possibly suggesting a second crash. It makes me skeptical that people talk of the Japanese gaming industry declining whereas it's simply evolved to survive: you never hear of a Konami or Namco Bandai going out of business, whereas we lost Midway at the beginning of last generation and THQ at the end of it. I don't think people appreciate how alarming that is, especially with Microsoft and Nintendo both struggling to gain traction with their newest systems.
To win back the Western market, Japan would need to dedicate themselves too it, and I think that recent Squenix announcment of opening up a new studio dedicated to console gaming might be for that very reason. I wouldn't be surprised if SE started making JRPGs for consoles that only get Western releases, it's telling how the U.S. is getting Type-0 HD first, even before Japan that SE wants to win back the console market for the genre and I honestly hope they succeed cause while I love my handhelds, I do wish I could get more use out of these console laying around my place. ;)
Fighting and Driving games are both basically the definition of "niche genre," especially Fighting games.
So are sports game but it doesn't change the fact they own a larger part of the market than most genres. :p
I probably feel differently about fighting games because I have frankly never met someone who hasn't played one before, while they certainly survive due to their niche status, they tend to surge back in popularity every few years thanks to a new series finally catering to the casual crowd. I think it would be difficult to imagine a gaming generation without a fighting game of some kind on it, so I consider it a staple however niche it really is. Either way, it still shows that RPGs are more popular than they are.
I think you need hard dollars and units as opposed to percentages here, since the gaming pie has grown astronomically since 2008, with genres and players that did not before exist. Namely music and rhythm games, the rise of the Wii, and dancing/fitness. The PS3 and 360 were also credited for growing the dedicated console audience larger than it was previously. We also have more PC games for casual players that were previously unavailable on console and made strides to cater to them once they arrived, like The Elder Scrolls and Call of Duty. So an inability to grow with the more mainstream influx of players does not necessarily reflect a retraction.
You're also mistaken when you say JRPGs conform with the modern game length since they only take 40 hours to beat, I assume you probably don't play those games so you wouldn't know. Most AAA action games can be beaten in 5-10 hours, the longest I recently remember is Deus Ex, at about 20. That is, unless they heavily recycle assets as I've mentioned before. Even then, Bethesda was only able to make about a 10 hour story in Skyrim.
I understand most AAA titles are super short but as I said, I don't feel the 30-40 hour mark is too long for the causal, especially since many of these games are short and with a week rental you can easily take out a game in quick succession since most JRPGs are ridiculously easy and leave the harder challenges to post-game nonsense. I mean FFX practically built the perfect model for this as the main campaign is short and easy with all the challenging elements catering to the hardcore fans opens near the end of the game. Titles like Xenosaga followed suit. .hack broken its game into 20 hour segments of four to tell its story and games like BoFV can be beaten in under 7 hours as well.
My feeling is that even a casual will know an RPG is a time sink compared to action titles and shooters but I don't agree they see this as a detriment and would thus not buy it because of it. I may agree it can be a factor, but like most problems concerning somethings fall from grace, I would point out I feel the issues stymying the genre is a combination of factors, which is why the genre has been having issues finding its footing because its difficult to tackle them all. Games like Xenoblade and Bravery Default are trying to modernize an aging gameplay structure and mechanic but are still battling issues of getting both wide-acceptance and figuring out how to deal with game length. The Last Story, Persona 3/4, and Valkyria Chronicles are trying to take the genre in a new direction but failed to reach wide acceptance and mostly created new niches for the genre instead. Tails simply caters to its fans and uses word of mouth and their monopoly of the consoles to stay afloat, and the Souls series was pretty much designed from the get-go as a niche genre which is why its surge in popularity last gen has probably baffled so many people. Even FF took a design they did for FFX and ran with it, not paying attention to the fact this design style ended up killing a few franchises in the PS2 era, which is why they were caught flat footed when the game received mixed reviews from fans and critics and they spent the sequels trying to figure out what the masses want. Even though the last gen expanded the gaming audience, I feel most would agree that last gen was pretty bad for the JRPG genre in general as it lacked any real strong contenders as opposed to the PS2 which was a JRPG powerhouse and the PS1 having what some consider to be the finest collection of the genre in its entire history. The question is why did it stumble so badly?
Bringing this back to the gaming model issue, while I feel we can attribute some of the genres problems to not conforming as well to changing dynamics in the industry, I feel that shouldn't change the sentiment to the more die-hard fans of the genre who are usually a bit hard pressed to name five JRPGs from last gen that are good enough to stand proudly with the roster of previous generations. I feel most would agree here that there was certainly a genuine lack of quality this generation and though there are some great games released, none of them were able to really capture the community like in previous generations. Part of me wants to ay the issue is that SE didn't really bother leading the industry like it did the previous generations, instead phoning in their services for the first half of the generation and then playing defensive for the second half as they deal with an audience that questions their ability to produce quality work as they stumbled with their in-house developed titles.
On the brightside, I would say SE learned their lessons and instead of trying to save this lacking last gen, decided to move all their products to next-gen so they could build a strong foothold for the new generation. I'm already annoyed I have to save my money up for a PS4 and eventually a Wii U because this gen looks far more promising.
I think we're talking past eachother again. You asked how I can't see a JRPG crisis when Square had expressed the difficulties in modern AAA development and I merely explained that this crisis is not particular to one genre. I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to say about game length, all I'm highlighting is that it's becoming impossible to reconcile fan expectations of an epic adventure lasting more than a few hours with the realities of console development.
Failure to capture an audience does not equate an identity crisis. I remember a Neogaf thread where a user posted the large list of RPGs that actually did come out on PS3 last generation and I honestly can't bring myself to say they look anymore niche than their PS2 predecessors. Admittedly, we did not receive a definitive console Final Fantasy or Dragon Quest but we did receive landmark titles in Demon's Souls, Valkyria Chronicles and Xenoblade. That's not a bad trade at all, doubly so if you remotely appreciate new IP standing out instead of established franchises.
When referring to JRPGs I am referring to a style of game, not a geographic point of origin (and if someone has a better term I would gladly use it). Just because Dark Souls was made in Japan does not make it a JRPG in the sense we are discussing here.
I think we are talking past each other as well, my point was that RPGs have adhered to modern development style so I don't feel its as much of a factor as you are putting it as. I still feel the issue is a combination of poor development practices, weak writing, adhering too much to niche audiences, and the continuation of placing story over the detriment of everything else.
I think the issue with the RPG landscape of last gen compared to previous is that we lost a lot of strong flagship franchises and the few we thought we could count on didn't really deliver so it just felt meh. There are certainly strong entries this past generation but I doubt their longevity as future franchises and frankly I felt they were few and far between. I still feel that PS2 simply had a more solid lineup than the PS3 could muster and the few exclusives that might have changed that opinion have moved on to greener pastures. I just don't see myself in five years talking about White Knight Chronicles or Arc Rise Fantasia the same way I'm willing to talk about Suikoden V, Digital Devil Saga, or DQVIII. Hell Okage crosses my mind more often than Enchanted Arms. ;)
I still feel the genre is simply reaping the problems it sowed in previous generations and now has to comply with an audience of very different generations who all feel entitled to have their "vision" of the genre be the only one.
Please, for the sake of common sense, stop comparing FFXIII with Uncharted. Goodness me. It's like comparing Grand Theft Auto IV with The Last of Us. They're bloody different games.
Uncharted, as much as I adore the series, is not a story focused game at all. It's a gameplay focused game, that happens to have great characters and a passable story (I mean, really, the Uncharted stories are generally about as basic and improbable as you'll get in gaming).
So if you're going to say...
...then at the very least bother to find a story driven action game. Mass Effect is probably a better example.Quote:
My point stands that a story driven action game can deliver a grand story on par with an RPG that had little else to offer.
Fact is, though, these games are shooters and shooters are generally the most popular games out there. They are dramatically different from JRPGs in so many ways that this very statement baffles me. You might as well question why point and click games are still a thing when every other game involves far more pointing and clicking and other stuff. Basically, some people don't want other stuff in their game.
And that's my pet peeve of this specific thread out of the way. :shifty:
Essentially I disagree that other games are doing story and character "just as good, if not better" than the best RPGs are, with extremely few exceptions (The Last of Us, Dreamfall, perhaps Mass Effect although it fell apart in the long run). I agree with anyone/everyone who says that the story writing is a major problem with RPGs today. I think the characters are often pretty good (I think people get stuck up on cliché personalities, but eccentrics are part of what makes a character interesting and there are only so many eccentricities you can make) but the plots themselves are often very thin, and the villians don't trigger emotional responses from us, nor do the 'big moments' in the games. I think the character dialogue tends to be okay, so the writing of the characters is fine, just... they have such great ideas they throw at us and then they never really grow on them to the correct degree. Also, they lack the balls to kill off characters, or put in any moments that will pluck at our heartstrings.
Finally, and I'm not sure if this has been brought up at all, but we experience emotive responses differently and to different things than we did when we were in our teens. Our age and life experience has probably not helped our case for getting emotional responses to moments in the games. Still, I know movies and TV shows can engage me fully, so it should be possible for games to do the same. The Last of Us and Journey did. Why not FFXIII? Just a poorly executed plot that started out so well and ended so meh.
Yet you do talk about Xenoblade that way, while others, like it or not, also see Valkyria Chronicles and the Souls games in the same light. A lot of people also seem to feel the same way about Bravely Default and Fire Emblem as well. I'm sure that feeling will keep going when Bloodbourne, Persona 5 and the new Ys all come out next year.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolf Kanno
Do you have anything else to fall back on at this point?