Originally posted by Advent
Ashley Riot is a guy from a PS1 game, I believe.
The absolutely legendary Vagrant Story, a game that Famitsu awarded a perfect score of 40/40 for, and a game objectively superior to Mass Effect and Knights of the Old Republic and Baldur's Gate 2 and Bioshock and Mass Effect and Bioshock. 😐
Originally posted by Nephthys
I don't see how you can you can put down one genre for attempting to do something (that you claim is essential to the genre) and then turn around and praise another for not even attempting that something.[/b]
Where did I claim that choice based control mechanics were essential? I recall stating the exact opposite.
And I praise JRPGs for choosing not to place emphasis on a game mechanic that does nothing in meeting the objective of the genre, for not trying to blindly emulate role playing games of a different format but adapting it into the video game format in a way that successfully achieves the objective of the genre, with masterful results. The fact that they tell stories more effectively than any book, movie, or TV show is also an added bonus, as is the masterful creation and implementation of video game music to enhance the storyline.
And although naturally the roleplaying aspect of the games are not perfect, but they are a damn sight better than JRPG's.
Choice based control mechanics =/= roleplaying aspects.
WRPGs for the most part utilise "roleplaying aspects" that don't fit into the format; JRPGs adapted the game into the format by introducing a new form of roleplaying. As far as using roleplaying aspects that work, WRPGs don't; JRPGs do so in abundance.
When I'm playing a jrpg there is always a feeling of separateness from the character I'm playing as, becuase simply put, that character is not me. I have not molded that character, not chosen what it has said, heck sometimes I even have no control of their fighting abilities. I know that I'm not playing as me, that isn't me on the screen, that is some other dipshit.
Well that's too bad but to deny that there is no value in storyline immersion in drawing the player into the role of the character simply based off of personal experience is a tad silly.
That is why jrpgs fail as a medium, they fail in making the character become the main character, in having the player create a wonderful story with their own hands, no matter how small of an input they have.
And what you're not getting is that control isn't essential in creating a roleplaying experience.
That is what an RPG is about. Not the story-line, the characters. Creating a character and having it interact with a pre-set world.
It's about the character's role within the setting; how the two components interact to form the storyline.
It is not a pale imitation of a table-top game, it is a platform-based version.
Please, I've already more than adequately explained how it is [a pale imitation]. The level of control is far more limited to the point where you're simply influencing a predetermined character through predetermined paths. In a table top or message board RPG you retain full control over your character's personality, dialogue, and choices as far as what the "rules" of the game allow.
You claim that it fails becuase it cannot offer the absolute freedom of the DnD boardgames, when even these did not do such a thing.Did you not have to choose from a pre-set list of races to create your character? Pre-set mission? Feats? Weapon? Etc? Yes. You are telling us that they fail in something they didn't even try to do. That my friend, is a sign of bias, which you obviously suffer from.
"in a table top RPG for instance, because while there, you choose exactly how your player behaves with no real limitations but your own imagination and the laws of the game setting"
Everything you've described would apply to real people living real lives. Naturally, as humans, we have no choice over how we're brought into the world, we do face personal limitations, and we are bound by certain laws. Obviously, RPGs have to face certain rules, and certain absolutes to the game and its setting, as well as the use of probability based gameplay mechanics that influence the success of some of your actions. However, the options at your disposal grant you complete control over your character within the confines of the laws and rules of the game; that is, complete control over dialogue, personality, and any limitations are no greater than the ones we face in real life. Thus, this creates a sense of individuality between player and character; you truly are the driving force behind your character. The same illusion isn't allowed with the limited nature of video games and pre determined elements that lack variety and scope.
JRPG's attempt to be books, to tell an epic tale with soaring heights and harrowing lows, but they are not books, they are games. You said that gameplay and combat etc was the worst point of the games, but you fail to see that they are GAMES.
That they technically take the form of a game doesn't mean that "gaming" has to be their primary function. You wouldn't suggest that would be the case with Wii Fit or Brain Age and the same applies to RPGs; their primary function is drawing the player into the role of the character; something that the gaming aspects are largely useless at achieving; this is where the emphasis on story comes from, and rightly so.
If you want to have that sort of thing go read an book or watch a movie.
This appears to assume that a book or a movie offers as much as far as storytelling is concerned as the videogames in question, and that there's no limit to this number of books and movies; for one, the videogames being referenced tell the most incredible storylines you can find in any medium, and secondly, the video game medium allows for a completely unique method of storytellling that you can't get in any other medium: a combination of mandatory storyline sequences along with optional storyline sequences that you control the pace and order of (such as speaking to random villagers in an RPG, or talking via the CODEK in the MGS games) creates a completely unique story based experience. Gameplay itself in story driven games largely fleshes out the "action" aspects of a story much in the same way that that a prolonged car chase or fight scene would in an action movie, only this time you are in direct control of the action, as would simulation aspects (such as purchasing items from a general store) though in a far more roleplaying related way.
Gameplay is one of the most, if not The most essential aspect of a game,
Not as far as RPGs are concerned; as I said it highlights the divide between player and character and emphasises the fact that you are actually playing a game.
its the reason why its a goddamn game and not one of those things, its why people buy the game in the first place, why it was made as a game. You are too hung up on just one aspect of a much greater whole. Is the story important? Yes. Is the gameplay important? Yes. A brain cannot survive without a body. A story cannot exist without its game. Deal with it.
Again, this is assuming that the only unique merits of the video game format can be provided for gameplay based uses; something that I've already thoroughly countered and something that the entire concept behind role playing games disagrees with.
Originally posted by heyrx,fkyou!!!!In your eyes yes, in reality, no.
The absolutely legendary Vagrant Story, a game that Famitsu awarded a perfect score of 40/40 for, and a game objectively superior to Mass Effect and Knights of the Old Republic and Baldur's Gate 2 and Bioshock and Mass Effect and Bioshock. 😐
Originally posted by Red Nemesis
Guys. [b]Stop talking to him. Even when he says stupid stuff.I know it can be hard, but just ignore it. I mean, I didn't respond to his categorization of Bioshock as a RPG even though it reeks of ignorance. No, I ignored it and moved on. I suggest you all do the same. [/B]
i'll be honest, its only the stupid stuff that i'm NOT going to respond too. there aren't that many regulars on this board anymore, and neb, let's face it, is as regular as any one of us.