Is Dark Souls a JRPG?

[Sephiroth]

You're oversimplifying what I'm trying to argue:

No, there are things that are just that simple. The problem is that you make use of something you argue against then use it in something that seems to be another context when in reality it is unfair to make them look like two different contextes because there actually is only one in our argument and all these things play a role together (and what you think of as Japanese mindset can only be called Japanese mindset for leading it back to where it comes from otherwise it would not be called Japanese mindset in the first place but I have a problem with acting like there is only one Japanese mindset because it is incredibly discriminatory against Japanese as well as their games). As a matter of fact you want to oversimplify things yourself by saying "JRPGs are just those with trait xyz" and telling me I am arguing in an oversimplifying way by actually mentioning a trait that, when led back to the very beginning, was always a real thing. Basically yes, those are two different contextes. But even your context makes use of my argument so it is redundant to even see it differently. Especially because what you think of reduces JRPGs to ideas that do not allow them to become different.

the names are based on their design philosophy, which were inspired by the developing markets and design philosophies unique to each culture

Who says the names are based on any design philosophy? Who exactly? JRPG design philosophy alone is something that does not even exist when making the first JRPG ever. And then another RPG in Japan is made that is different from that. What is the JRPG now according to your logic? And as said already, even if that is a given, the entire "each culture" argument you use cannot be used without acknowledging that what you think of as JRPG was, let's say it is 1982 and we live in Japan and make the first RPG ever, was called JRPG because it came from Japan. How can you even claim that only a certain mindset can be used to influence what you think you know as a RPG? This cannot be the case at all. Imagine these games would have started out differently. They would have been made with what you call another philosophy than the one you think you know as the philosophy as JRPGs. But they would have no right because some thought about an apparently superior philosophy is only able to magically make something a JRPG? No. No at all. Back in the days we knew JRPGs for certain aspects. That is totally correct - but they were still called JRPG because they have been led back to Japan. As said, your "each culture" thing even partially makes use of it so I do not even know why this is argued about. It is really just unfair to newer games because it means old Japanese mindsets have defined and influenced what we knew as JRPGs but new Japanese mindsets cannot influence them as well.

As the subgenres evolved, the names don't necessarily describe the nation of origin, but rather the style of games' it is influenced by's nation of origin. Like I said, a practitioner of Austrian Economics does not cease to be so when they aren't Austrian. Moroccan cuisine does not suddenly become British cuisine just because it's prepared in the UK.

Of course Sushi originally comes from Japan. When I make Sushi this exact Sushi is German nonetheless. Now if you ask "and why is the original idea of sushi Japanese?" then you are perfectly agreeing with me because then you once more would have to make use of the origin explanation as you have done multiple times while trying to tell me otherwise. Origin always plays a role, in one way or the other. You cannot simply forget it. Not even in your own argument. And while you seem to be so eager to argue about subgenres and all from nowadays I say that, and I am repeating myself here, you are simply giving a genre a treatment that is not fair at all by reducing it to something like "ideas that only like this can define it with the country not playing a role except when you need it for your own argument".

have you noticed Undertale is called a WRPG or Dark Souls isn't classified as a JRPG?

No, I have not noticed because anyone I have talked to flat out says Dark Souls is a JRPG. All I can see is you trying to say the philosophy you think of is superior to the origin argument even though the old philosophy also made use of its origin.

EDIT: There is a difference between a Japanese role-playing game and a Japanese-style Role-Playing Game (JRPG).

As said, only if you are unfair and do not let them evolve. Or to answer you fitting: "No, all of them are Japanese Role-Playing Games. There is just a difference between a Japanese Role-Playing Game that we know as classic with traits we are used to (that is what it should be called and not the reducing "Japanese-styled" as if there can only be one Japanese style) and a Japanese Role-Playing Game with traits that we are not used to. They will always be Japanese Role-Playing Games though".

Anyway, I'm outta here.

I hate trashypedia by the way but even they immediately acknowledge the origin.

[Skyblade]

Fine, you can call it "Japanese Role-Playing Game that we know as classic with traits we are used to".

The rest of us are fine with "JRPG" as an abbreviation.

[Sephiroth]

Fine, you can call it "Japanese Role-Playing Game that we know as classic with traits we are used to".

The rest of us are fine with "JRPG" as an abbreviation.

Obviously not all people reduce JRPGs to just those traits so please spare me your classic "I have a personal aversion against Sephiroth" contribution. It does not help at all. There is a reason why Squall gave this thread its name instead of just calling it "I have seen it as a Western RPG made in Japan and it is a fact that it is no JRPG".

[Skyblade]

Fine, you can call it "Japanese Role-Playing Game that we know as classic with traits we are used to".

The rest of us are fine with "JRPG" as an abbreviation.

Obviously not all people reduce JRPGs to just those traits so please spare me your classic "I have a personal aversion against Sephiroth" contribution. It does not help at all. There is a reason why Squall gave this thread its name instead of just calling it "I have seen it as a Western RPG made in Japan and it is a fact that it is no JRPG".

Um, that post had nothing to do with a personal aversion to you.

It's simply that I think your point is relatively nonsensical and irrelevant.

You argue that "Japanese" can only be used as a descriptive element specifically discussing the origin country of the game.

Plenty of words have multiple meanings, and even single standard meanings that change in the context of how it's used (such as "Polish" having a completely different meaning if it's an adjective describing "sausage"). So your argument that there is "one true definition" that is the only one you accept is just a bad argument.

What's more, languages change frequently, and words adopt new definitions in common usage all the time, far faster than dictionaries are updated, and this has only accelerated in the information age.

Finally, you've utterly failed in the same area that EVERYONE who has ever made the argument against the JRPG/WRPG terms has: You were unable to produce a viable term to use in it's place. It's a genre. You KNOW it's a genre, because you were able to single it out and define it, and everyone knew exactly what you meant. It's a individual style of games and game design that follows distinct conventions that are recognized universally by gamers, and who have given it a clear and obvious term based on that style's origin and history.

You don't like it. I'm sorry about that, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be used. It's a label. It's a convenient way to group things, summarize things, and describe them quickly without having to write paragraphs at a time to get your point across. If I say "first person shooter", you have a basic grasp of some of the core game. You know what to expect. Same thing if I say "platformer" or "puzzle game" or "visual novel". "JRPG" is nothing more than another of these labels, created by gamers, to describe their pastimes to other gamers.

If you want the term "JRPG" to stop being used, then provide an alternative name for the genre that clearly and concisely conveys the meaning of the individual genre that we can all use. Because, again "Japanese Role-Playing Game that we know as classic with traits we are used to" is stupid when we already have a term that is universally recognized by gamers, is short, easy to type, and easy to abbreviate.

The fact that you have no alternative, and instead had to resort to a fifteen word phrase to convey what any of us could capture with four letters, shows just how helpful labels can be.

[Squall Leonhart Loire]

I have a friend who pushes to me that FF is a WRPG made in Japan. He says that it's more western than other JRPGs.

[Sephiroth]

You argue that "Japanese" can only be used as a descriptive element specifically discussing the origin country of the game.

Obviously I do not argue that. If you would have taken the time to lean back and read my posts you would know that. The implication was that the "Japanese" in "JRPG", so in this context, the word that you yourself try to use against me, comes from that, which it does because there was one point in time where this word came into existence. It is the most essential aspect, that is my point and you cannot just let that out. I even said that Laddy means something different so obviously you can use it for something else - there are certain moments when you just should not because they are easy to be mistaken then. Later more about that. There is a reason why Wikipedia says "Eastern RPGs are RPGs that come from county xyz" and not "Eastern RPGs are RPGs that reflect the mindset of developer xyz".

Plenty of words have multiple meanings, and even single standard meanings that change in the context of how it's used (such as "Polish" having a completely different meaning if it's an adjective describing "sausage"). So your argument that there is "one true definition" that is the only one you accept is just a bad argument.

That is a totally unnecessary lecturing about contextualization and semantics considering I am a person that cares about context in such a nitpicky way that it is already neurotic. My argument was that a certain term originated from something, which it did. Do not try to turn my words around in any way because it was "one guy saying it comes from x" against "one guy that posted the next thing saying it does not come from x but from y instead". Something coming from Japan is not nearly as restrictive as a trait as saying "it has to have this certain mindset", as if some people in Japan changing their whole mentality suddenly would "un-Japanese" them. That is so discriminatory. It means their mentality cannot evolve and their games also cannot. And as said, in no way the Japanese origin can be forgotten. You try to support Laddy here and that is all fine but mindsets just are not limited to one kind of person.

Finally, you've utterly failed in the same area that EVERYONE who has ever made the argument against the JRPG/WRPG terms has: You were unable to produce a viable term to use in it's place.

Seeing how I have classified them way better by separating them, something that you just for the sake of provocation made fun of, it was far from an utter failure. There are plenty of people all over the world who, once you say "do you know this JRPG/WRPG?" answer you "it is no real JRPG/WRPG, it just looks like one but developer x made it actually" not everyone is just fine with it. Of course you know what people mean when they use the word, that does not mean that it is enough. It is like saying "oh it is okay to call a strawberry a berry because everyone knows what you mean" when in reality a strawberry is botanically not berry or people constantly saying "it is okay to say calories because many people use it when the actually mean kilo calories because kilo calories" are what we actually need to consume per pay and not just calories but people do not realize that. It can actually lead to real misunderstandings. So tell me once again how me saying "this is not a JRPG it looks like what you know as an old-school one but that's about it" is a problem for anyone and causes any misunderstanding. I have never even heard of a single person where I live that was convinced that Final Fantasy XV was not a JRPG. They all know it is from Japan but acknowledge that it has classic traits of what we know of Western Role-Playing Games. Also there is a very clever way to call them something: "Classic or Old-School JRPG".

You don't like it.

Always good how things are reduced to a simple "you don't like it therefore you say that". And here I thought your post actually had a whole paragraph about contextualization.

So if you are so convinced that what I am saying is nonsensical and irrelevant then you might also be able to tell me why every person that ever actually conversed with me for 5 minutes and was not just arguing for the sake of arguing and did not mind longer explanations never had a problem with them. You use "stupid", "irrelevant" and all. Others do not seem to think so. I tend to talk long with people and much but actually acting like I would not consider proper context is about as wrong as a claim about the neurotic Compuer Scientist-Video Game-Addict-Overanalyzing-Person I am that defines everything to death can be. Also it is very self-ironic because most internet arguments with me come from others no thinking about the right context and are not even ready for the basics of Communication Psychology because they do not even want to think about what could be okay about their communication partner's parts. Which I at least do and, even while not that present in this chat right now, can definitely be seen very often in other conversations. You are telling me we would understand what people mean with "JRPG", well, maybe you are satisfied with that. I am a person that aims for higher understanding of things. I do not just want to live with "yeah there is this but actually there is a flaw in that because of ..." And to bring back the word "context" again - using a word like "JRPG" like this you still have to make it understandable enough for people in which way and sentence you mean this word. So there is obviously something that there is to work on. As a matter of fact I even was the one who once was not that unequivocal with what he meant in a conversation about the Souls series once with a video game addict/seller. He wanted to sell it to me and I said "I mainly like JRPGs" and he said "Souls is from Japan", so I had to re-phrase "I mean JRPGs that look like traditional JRPGs". So as you can see, I even admit that I made the same mistake that leads others to misunderstand me, even more highlighting the problem with this term so I have even more reason to be more specific and not just because I am so neurotical.

The fact that you have no alternative, and instead had to resort to a fifteen word phrase to convey what any of us could capture with four letters, shows just how helpful labels can be.

Not only do I have an alternative, I also did not say labels are useless. Whereever you have read that in my comments. And constantly misreading or misusing words is => not helpful at all. Just as people calling me crazy for saying that the average adult needs 2.5 million calories (2.5k kilo calories) per day because they think it is incredibly much when in reality it is not, because the unit that they normally call "calories" are "kilo calories" and I just use "calories" correctly as well as "kilo calories". There is a reason why things are classified more and more. Now give a person "2.5 million calories" as they would misuse the word, so 2.5 million kilo calories and let's see what happens. So you are absolutely right. Correct wording is helpful. And even more helpful is even more accurate wording.

[Spuuky]

The "correct" meaning of a word is whatever conveys your intended meaning to the listener. Words have no inherent meaning, they are a tool to convey ideas. If you are conveying the idea you intend to when you say "JRPG" to someone, you are using it correctly. If you are not conveying the idea you intend, which depends on the listener's interpretation, you are not using the correct word.

Of COURSE it is correct to say "berry" when you point at strawberries, because you have accurately conveyed your idea to the listener. To suggest that this isn't "correct" in a normal, non-academic context is objectively wrong and represents a gross misunderstanding of the nature of language.

[Sephiroth]

The "correct" meaning of a word is whatever conveys your intended meaning to the listener.

That is acceptable for an ordinary chat but not when it is really important. There is a reason why people who are actually familiar with certain meanings of words intend to point out what they mean. For something as ridiculous as video games you might now think "how is it important" then but this is just my nitpickiness.

-Of COURSE it is correct to say "berry" when you point at strawberries, because you have accurately conveyed your idea to the listener.
-To suggest that this isn't "correct" in a normal, non-academic context is objectively wrong and represents a gross misunderstanding of the nature of language.

- Not in the botanical context.
- I even used the word "botanic" so I do not see any point in mentioning this because it was already contextualized.


And you do not need to tell me anything about Communication. I know Paul Watzlawick's 5 Axioms of Communication Psychology so this is not necessary at all. It was a part of my Education/Psychology lectures. Part of this communication psychology does not actually mean that a disturbance of communication automatically means you have used the wrong word. It would mean that the interpretation of the other one that you have mentioned could never be the true, which it can be very well. Often you can modifiy your modalities of communication the best way you can do and the most accurate way you know but the other one can still misunderstand you and that can have various reasons, not necessarily because you did something wrong.

[Spuuky]

You are not accurately conveying meaning to anyone when you say "this sushi is German" about sushi technically made within the national boundaries of Germany. You are being pedantic at the cost of understanding.

[Sephiroth]

You are not accurately conveying meaning to anyone when you say "this sushi is German" about sushi technically made within the national boundaries of Germany. You are being pedantic at the cost of understanding.

If a person understands that I am talking about the Sushi being made in German then it is correct. Your little rule of "whichever word is used" would count for me as well then and just as I have the choice of pointing out the context for a person the other person - hopefully - has the capability to correctly interpret. You calling me pendantic when I have pointed out others are just like me means what in your eyes? We are all doing it wrong? I can tell you we do not.

[Spuuky]

If this is the case, then surely you can accept the use of "JRPG" to refer to the set of games with similar design elements that most people automatically think of when they hear the term "JRPG."

[Sephiroth]

If this is the case, then surely you can accept the use of "JRPG" to refer to the set of games with similar design elements that most people automatically think of when they hear the term "JRPG."

I never said "I do not accept it". I have no choice but to accept that there are people who will always do that. I have no choice to accept that one day I will die. That does not mean I cannot talk about other things.

[Vyk]

When this first started to get heated i was kinda exasperated but it's actually an interesting topic. Unfortunately I fall into the court where I use JRPG to describe a style rather than an origin. Even though, understandably, most come from Japan. And I also generally tire of Japan's reliance of tropes and clichés as actual character writing. Agreed that WRPGs use cliches and tropes just as much, but it seems in my experience that they tend to just use it as a starting point to build off of. But the final thing that makes me cautious (note: NOT turned off, just cautious), when someone says JRPG is Japanese creators' general inability or struggle to tell or convey the difference between drama and melodrama. And typically they lean into melodrama. But I love love love when they have real writing, real character, real drama. Bravely Default used archetypes as a base and built off them and had real drama sprinkled in. Star Ocean The Last Hope was pure tropes and cliches and archetypes with very little building and pure melodrama and bad writing and characterization

[Squall Leonhart Loire]

The only WRPGs I have played are Elder Scrolls, the first two Fallout games, and The Witcher. Personally I agree they use cliches too.

[Sephiroth]

Star Ocean The Last Hope was pure tropes and cliches and archetypes with very little building and pure melodrama and bad writing and characterization

I assume you did not trigger the private actions in the Calnus?