| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (49)

Posted: Nov 25th 2011 4:31PM RasenganFury said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Valkyria Chronicles says hello

Posted: Nov 25th 2011 4:34PM Eniko said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
You see, there's this thing called Tactical RPGs, not all RPGs should be like them... though there are some like Front Mission that Double Helix just felt like crushing it into a wall.

I actually prefer things being this way, that way It's not over-saturated with Tactical RPGs.

Posted: Nov 25th 2011 4:42PM TheOtherJames said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
"Imagine a Final Fantasy game in which you have to read your opponents' moves during each turn and execute complex defensive schemes to prevent them from attacking."

Grandia 2 and 3 come to mind.

"Turn-based combat has no such moments. Even when JRPG developers pack their battles with gargantuan summoned beasts and flashy spells, they can never really emulate that jolt of excitement that hits you when your quarterback throws an 80-yard touchdown."

I tend to run into those moments in just about every RPG I play. At one point I will run into a battle so difficult or unexpected that nothing but a little skill and a lot of luck carries me through. They're rare, but just like in football, that's what makes them special. Some RPGs do manage to script those moments in. The end of Persona 4 comes to mind.

"Have you ever played a JRPG where every single battle mattered?"

Have you ever seen a football game where every single play mattered? A majority of plays in football just change where you punt from later on. That's no more exciting than a battle that just gives you a little more XP.

"I want to play a turn-based JRPG in which combat is something I care about, not just that thing I do between each scene of the story. Is that so much to ask?"

And I'd like to see a football game that doesn't bore me 90% of the time, but we can't all get what we want. Maybe sports aren't my thing, and maybe JRPGs aren't yours. At least the RPG has the story. The best football can do is this: http://xkcd.com/904/

Posted: Nov 25th 2011 4:46PM TheOtherJames said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@TheOtherJames

Thought: How does the comparison hold up if you compare battles in a JRPG to plays in a game, instead of games in a seson?
Reply

Posted: Nov 25th 2011 5:04PM Ravenok said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@TheOtherJames
If you compare battles vs. plays in a game mattering, I think it's important to remember that every play in a game *can* matter; there is always that potential for a big play. Whereas, the vast majority of battles in any JRPG I've ever played never even had the potential for relevance--they were just there to pad my XP, and I knew it.

Sure, if you look back at the average play in a game, it may not seem important, but that's not the mentality those teams had going into it, and I'd love for all battles to feel as fresh and significant.
Reply

Posted: Nov 25th 2011 5:04PM Kougeru said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
@TheOtherJames *clap clap clap* Nicely said.
Reply

Posted: Nov 25th 2011 5:29PM TheOtherJames said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Ravenok

Good point. There are a few JRPGs where a random encounter will turn out to be some special battle, but I can't think of them off the top of my head, and even then they're usually obviously special from the beginning.

But in counterpoint, you sometimes get an unexpected reward from random battles. New equipment that helps boost you ahead for example.
Reply

Posted: Nov 25th 2011 5:32PM Clydeftones said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@TheOtherJames if you dont enjoy sports games, why on earth are you attempting to crush this idea? Jason clearly states he is a fan of both sports games and JRPGs and then attempts to Frankenstein the 2 genres he loves. Without an appreciation for sports games, or at minimum a tolerance and understanding of their function, you wont grasp the post.
Reply

Posted: Nov 26th 2011 3:50PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@TheOtherJames
I see where you're coming from, and I felt the same way for the longest time, but, I actually played full contact tackle football on a team this year for the first time, and it was a pretty incredible learning experience.

The thing about plays mattering or not mattering is that you're looking at outcome and statistics. On the field, none of those players go in thinking "this doesn't matter." You go out there and throw the ball or hand it off, and try to get just enough, even if statistically, you're not going to score and you're going to have to punt. It differs depending on the skill level and the amount of strategy, but you can see games turn around very drastically because the players or coaches or playcallers learned something after every drive, and adapted their strategy with each punt. Or sometimes it's just luck, I'm not discounting that.

I guess the point is that a football game is won when a team clicks together and executes a well-planned strategy. Or the other team doesn't click, or the other team drops the ball. That's kind of hard to translate into a JRPG, and when you're just looking at statistics and numbers, you're completely missing the point, which is the very human successes and failures. I can totally understand if that's not important to you, though, as it never was for me until very recently. I think, if anything, JRPGs are missing that weight, which could be to the benefit of permanent character death, or something to that effect. It's not a perfect parallel, but it works as an analogy, and I do think that the author is correct in saying JRPGs could learn a thing or two from what works/doesn't work about football.
Reply

Posted: Feb 9th 2012 4:22PM jms1218 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@TheOtherJames "There are a few JRPGs where a random encounter will turn out to be some special battle, but I can't think of them off the top of my head, and even then they're usually obviously special from the beginning."

Mimana: Iyar Chronicle comes to mind.

Reply

Posted: Nov 25th 2011 4:44PM Draco said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The Suikoden games had interesting battles, for example the ship battles (while weird) were entertaining having to select the proper type of attack, same with the 1 on 1 battles, or the army vs army battles.

The DS has Fire Emblem a Tactical-RPG where if your unit dies in combat he is gone for good,

I wouldn't be too opposed to playing a JRPG where there are very few battles, or only boss battles, but then what is to stop you from exploring every inch of every dungeon if no the fear of death?

Posted: Nov 25th 2011 4:55PM Nateous said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It's funny that JRPG's get flack for the use of common troupes and archetypes, were sports games are by design the same thing since "tecmo bowl" on the NES. Each year it's literally the same thing only slightly prettier or a "new" game mechanic. And every 10 months or so there's the same game with An updated roster. I guess I'll never understand

Posted: Nov 25th 2011 6:50PM Puertoricarious said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Nateous

Your comparison is flawed because you're comparing the content (football as a game vs. JRPG story), when what really has changed is the gameplay. Yes, all football video games revolve around a game that hasn't changed. But, if you look at the progression of gameplay mechanics in major football games from Tecmo to today's Madden, there's been a tremendous overhaul of the gameplay mechanics in terms of how you pass, run, defend, select plays, maintain rosters, etc.

To say that JRPGs haven't progressed is a pretty unfair generalization.....but then you turn around make as equal a generalization about sports games. And to top it off, you do it in response to an article where the main point is that seemingly dissimilar games and audiences can all learn from each other.
Reply

Posted: Nov 25th 2011 7:54PM Nateous said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Puertoricarious I disagree. This article, is opinionated and therefore inherently biased. (Much like everyone's responses) how the author could start by saying that JRPGS should possibly take some ideas from football games is ripe with flame bait! Maybe my hyperbole was unfair, yes there have been changes since the mid 90's in terms of gameplay, but honestly, which genre has seen the most innovation "this" generation. If you think its ANY sports game you'd be sadly mistaken.

Personally, yes I think JRPGs could use a redesign to a degree, but I doubt getting inspiration from a serialized cash cow is the way to do it.

Sports games (open mouth insert foot) in my opinion is as formulaic as anything. however, its an expected thing. I know how to play football, i know plays, i know stats, quarters, risks, %'s etc. and therefore, i can justify a $60 purchase based on those expectations. You really cant lose betting on a sports game (for the most part, mind you, see NBA ELITE).

JRPGs have undergone much criticism and speculation, in part because its "not" as formulaic. its very divisive (depending on demographic) on whats considered successful. IMO, this makes it a "riskier" genre to support. Case in point: how many western developers are working on JRPG's, or even better, how many JRPG's get localized across the board? Odds are, very few. The flips side is no contest, so please dont even bring it up.

I'm not trying to argue one is better than the other, simply I dont agree with coming to the table and saying Sports + JRPGs are strange bedfellows
Reply

Posted: Nov 25th 2011 9:29PM Puertoricarious said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Nateous

"Personally, yes I think JRPGs could use a redesign to a degree, but I doubt getting inspiration from a serialized cash cow is the way to do it. "

If anything, I think it's all the more reason why JRPGs need to pay attention. If a serialized cash cow can capture the mind of the gaming community year in, year out with minimal revamping, while JRPGs with 4-5 year development cycles fall flat on their face, JRPG developers and fans have little to lose by asking themselves what they can learn.

I think the key here is not to make this into a slippery slope/throw the baby out with the bath water thing. I'd be the last person to endorse turning JRPGs into rote, serialized ports like many sports games. But I don't think anyone loses anything when they ask themselves why something on the other side is finding success, as long as their committed to preserving what is unique to the JRPG genre in the process.

To play devil's advocate, here's how JRPG developers should NOT be going about this: http://www.joystiq.com/2011/11/21/kitase-square-learnt-a-lesson-with-ff-xiii-franchise-needs-m/
Reply

Posted: Nov 25th 2011 5:04PM TopGunZ said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
Well, this is why I never get what people find amusing about sports games. I mean if you can play a game with statistics, why do it with a regural guy wearing some dull uniform throwing around a ball, instead of a paladin/space trooper/soldier of fortune wearing some holy armor/exoskeleton/bulletproof vest carrying an Excalibur/lazer rifle/scoped shotgun with grenade launcher. And even more, why buy the same thing every year because of some graphic and control tweaks?

Posted: Nov 25th 2011 5:23PM Clydeftones said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@TopGunZ ...do you seriously not get why people enjoy sports games or are you just looking for an excuse to ramble about why you like sci-fi/fantasy aesthetics?
Reply

Posted: Nov 26th 2011 5:13PM TopGunZ said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
@Clydeftones
I seriously don't get why people like sports games. Getting downvoted for it also rather gives me a sense of self assurance.
Reply

Posted: Nov 25th 2011 5:05PM Acosta02 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"Have you ever played a JRPG where every single battle mattered? Has anybody? "

What about FFXIII? whether it worked or not is debatable, but the design of the game was intended to make every battle an individual challenge. You get healed after every battle and can retry from where you died if you lose. The idea was to make it so that battles weren't designed to slowly grind you down over a dungeon, but instead present a different situation that you ideally would have to "solve" with proper tactics (using the paradigm system).

FFXIII kind of chickened out in fear of the fans, but what they tried to go for is basically what you're talking about.

Posted: Nov 25th 2011 6:39PM ReadingRambo said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Acosta02

That model was awful and I never beat the game. By the final chapter I was SICK of it. Make the battles fun, not a puzzle...every. single. time.
Reply

Posted: Nov 25th 2011 8:46PM Apsac D said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@ReadingRambo

You got sick of pressing auto-battle and letting these so called 'puzzles' figure themselves out?

I enjoyed Final Fantasy XIII, but battles were fairly exciting and quite far from puzzles. Physical-based attacks or magic-based attacks is a choice, not a puzzle.
Reply

Posted: Nov 25th 2011 9:25PM Acosta02 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Apsac D

The "puzzle" is in which classes your characters are set to, not what attacks they are using.

Also, (not to you but in general) try not to read too much into my use of the word "puzzle." I'm not saying these battles are a sudoku or something. I'm saying "puzzle" in the same way I would call getting through a patrolled room in Arkham Asylum or Metal Gear Solid a "puzzle." It's a problematic situation with an ideal solution that can be achieved through proper application of the player or character's abilities.
Reply

Posted: Nov 25th 2011 5:26PM Clydeftones said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Joystiq, do more stuff like this please. It is interesting, unique and decidedly apart from the standard routine of predictable posts based on the current news cycle. I just hope the comments section doesnt turn into a depressing ocean of attempted counterpoints that ignore the outstanding base of the post. More please.

Posted: Nov 25th 2011 6:04PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Clydeftones Thanks! This JRPG column runs every Friday!
Reply

Posted: Nov 25th 2011 6:33PM Blackbird said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Clydeftones

I agree, and unfortunately it looks like a majority of gamers reading this seem to take it as a chance to explain why Madden sucks.

To those that don't understand why you would want to play a game of strategy and stats rooted in reality instead of in a fantastical setting, its similar to reading fiction novels. Some people love reading about conflicts in different worlds or universes, and some can't stand it and would rather read something like Tom Clancy - still not real, but more so than a fantasy novel is.

Also, it's even more fun if you follow and/or played football at some point, because you understand the underlying mechanics without needing a tutorial.
Reply

Posted: Nov 25th 2011 9:07PM Special Agent Bob said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Clydeftones
Whelp my fridays went from joystiq Fridays to JRPGFriday.
Reply

Posted: Nov 25th 2011 7:19PM TaengtheHero said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
So, let me get this straight. You want one battle that is the most intensive, critical, mind-blowing thing ever that keeps you on the edge of your seat every second, and that's it? Instant level-up to 100?

Posted: Nov 25th 2011 9:18PM Puertoricarious said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@TaengtheHero

Square Enix presents: Final Fantasy XV, directed by Michael Bay.
Reply

Posted: Nov 26th 2011 2:15PM TaengtheHero said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Puertoricarious lol, I don't get why Micheal Bay gets so much hate. I loved the first two Transformers movies.
Reply

Posted: Nov 25th 2011 7:45PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@That One Guy Dude, I love JRPGs. That's why I write a weekly column about them. I am singling out and criticizing the genre because I want it to get better.

Posted: Nov 25th 2011 9:17PM Puertoricarious said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@That One Guy

I think you're taking this completely the wrong way. I think it's less about singling out JRPGs as proglematic and more trying to answer "Why are JRPGs suffering so badly in a Western market where they once thrived?" And along with that, "What can we do to bring them back?"

Sure, there's no dearth of generic platformers, generic FPS's, etc., but none of those genres as a whole are in the state that the JRPG is in this country. This article doesn't single them out........the gaming market has already done that. I see this column as an attempt to figure out why.

Posted: Nov 25th 2011 9:37PM 9inchsamurai said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
JRPGs don't need fewer battles in order to be more exciting, they just need to make the battles more important. Having fewer battles might not even achieve this: it's all about balancing party strength vs. potential enemy groups. Final Fantasy 1 contains a good number of encounters that could potentially end your game - and they're just "normal" battles.

Following your comparison: in football the offensive and defensive sides have about the same "stats" hence the difference between a successful play and a failed play more or less boils down to the strategy each side picks. Whereas in most current JRPGs, the player's party is at least 3 times stronger than any given encounter.

Some exceptions to this rule exist, like (believe it or not) Pokemon. If Nintendo actually felt like creating a hard Pokemon game, the inherent battle system would be really well balanced because your Pokemon team would be about on the same level as an opponent's team, and most of the strategy in each battle would be about choosing the correct moves to counter what the opponent does (hey, kinda like my analogy above with football).

Posted: Nov 25th 2011 10:32PM Clydeftones said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@9inchsamurai your Pokemon point is weirdly perfect. Great post. Depth of combat when balanced with challenging opponents could make these rather mundane encounters more valuable.
Reply

Posted: Nov 25th 2011 10:23PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
All this tells me, is that Dragon Force for the Saturn deserves a sequel using today's hardware... or at least an opportunity to reacquaint itself to audiences, and let developers stare at it, and attempt to work out what aspects do, and do not translate, and how they could improve on the formula.

Posted: Nov 25th 2011 11:41PM This Little Man Says His Name Is said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@That One Guy

Maybe you could try reading the blurb that has been at the top of every single one of these articles that has been about JRPGs

"This is a column by Jason Schreier dedicated to the analysis (and occasional mocking) of his favorite genre, the Japanese role-playing game. Whether it's because they're too antiquated or just too niche, he believes JRPGs don't get enough attention in the gaming industry today. It's time to change that."

It clearly states the Jasons' favourite genre is JRPGs so he's writing articles on them expressing and exploring some of his ideas about the genre. How exactly does that translate into singling out JRPGs.

Posted: Nov 26th 2011 3:01AM maxwell97 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Good column. I think JRPG's, like 2D fighting games and FPS games, are just mired in the design conventions of the past. A JRPG without innumerable grinding battles is not a JRPG, much like a fighting game without magical fireballs isn't a fighting game. The customer base doesn't carry over if a developer innovates too much. Take a look at Demon's Souls - it's a Japanese RPG, but no one thinks of it as a "JRPG," exactly because there's no turn-based battles or anime art design.

Posted: Nov 26th 2011 7:50AM xbit said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The same tired ideas, rehashed year after year with very little innovation.

JRPGs are already borrowing a lot from Madden's book.

Posted: Nov 26th 2011 8:06AM Guybrush said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Say what? JRPG need to be more like rugby? But with full body safety gear, stupid breaks every five seconds and a load of girls playing the sport?

Posted: Nov 26th 2011 9:55AM Clydeftones said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Guybrush watch out guys, we're dealing with a badass over here
Reply

Posted: Feb 2nd 2012 2:18AM OClvl3 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Guybrush You know, rugby that game for "tough guys." A game that is kinda fun to play and PAINFUL to watch. I love how rugby guys act like they play in the toughest game in the world. They don't even play the toughest game with the ball they use, let alone sport in general.
Reply

Posted: Nov 26th 2011 10:17AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@That One Guy Yes, I have focused and will be focusing on lots of different subjects revolving around the JRPG genre. That's why this is a weekly column!

Posted: Nov 26th 2011 12:05PM rowd149 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I can't imagine that the guy who writes this column actually likes JRPGs. Every single entry he's posted so far has been flamebait rambling about some idea that would fundamentally change what makes a JRPG a JRPG (usually cramming in a random mechanic found in Western games, the avoidance of which is /why/ we tend to like JRPGs). This is getting irritating. How about a post that actually has some thought put into it?

Posted: Nov 26th 2011 3:56PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified)
Also, each individual player is out there at 100% for every play (hopefully). Even if you're a receiver and it's a running play, you have to either block or make it look like a passing play to make holes in the appropriate places. It'd be like if you were playing poker and made a certain face every time you received a 3, etc. The trick with strategy is to not let them know what you're doing, or to let them know but exploit it.

Looking at a 20 yard run or a 50 yard reception, nobody really cares what XYZ player was doing, other than whoever got the touchdown, first down, whatever. People fixate on stars and big plays, and that diminishes everything else when you're an observer. Yes, X character may do only 5 damage, but if you take that character out, the monster goes down in 6 hits instead of 4, which means you'll have to heal or be careful if the monster gets a critical. Does it really matter? Sure. Do people care about either? Not really. I think that's an issue both face.

Posted: Nov 27th 2011 2:41PM Kade Storm said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Thank the dead God and the hyped Devil for the JRPG monolith containing it's own sub-genre of tactical RPGs.

And America's most loved sport because it is the most "well-designed game"? *Laughs.*

Posted: Nov 27th 2011 9:20PM kazrikna said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
You should look into a couple of games that I've found to have a really good battle system that does utilize defense. The battles aren't always meaningful, but the unimportant ones are usually very quick.

Mana Khemia: Alchemists of Al-Revis
Mana Khemia 2: Fall of Alchemy

Both are PS2 games, the PSP versions are sub-optimal.

You have 3 characters up front and 3 characters backing them up. The backing characters have to charge for a certain amount of time being in the back before they can be brought forward. The interesting thing is in how they're brought forward. To get the really high damage attacks, you attack with one of your front characters, then chain to a back character to deal extra damage. If you use all 3 backing characters, it can do tremendous damage with the Variable Strike attacks. If you use them for attacking though, you lose the ability to use them for defense. Any time one of your front characters is attacked, you can swap a backing character in to take the damage. As your characters get stronger, they have added abilities that can shield the entire party from damage, or strengthen them in another way when swapped in defensively. It becomes very strategic on if you have weak characters that might need protecting in the front vs. saving them to do damage to the enemy, and some enemies require you to go all out with combos in attacking them to even damage them, so you have to get your defenses into a position so you can last a few rounds of pounding after you do a large attack.

The other ones to try would be the Grandia series, which lets you utilize your attacks to cancel the enemy's attacks if you time it just right.

Posted: Nov 29th 2011 1:11PM TrueWhiteBoy said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Something that could be interesting would be "injuries"

May it so certain characters unuseable for a couple battles.
This would be a rather interesting, possibly rather annoying game.

hahahaha

Posted: Feb 3rd 2012 4:40PM Mr Itcher said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Baseball is kinda like an Active Time Battle if you think about it.

Posted: Feb 3rd 2012 6:13PM roshacla said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
My heart honestly dropped a bit when I saw the title of this post. I have been designing a JRPG style battle system based around this exact idea. The similarities of running plays with a team and orchestrating a strategy with a party of different characters with different roles is quite striking. I've just begun coding it for my advanced software project at school, so hopefully this idea pays dividends. I hope no one else has beaten me to the punch :P

Anyway, JRPG's were my absolute favorite genre, but have slowly fallen down my list of preferences. This is because they have become all flash and fan service with no substance. Outside of the rare gems like Valkyrie Profile (the first one only) or Breath of Fire: Dragon Quarter, everything else has been a rather brutal let down. My problem with JRPG's is that rather then change the mold, they have actually regressed in terms of gameplay.

The strategy found in games like FF4 is much greater then in any modern game. Why? It is difficult and you have a large party with lots of options. Modern Japanese role playing games for some reason seem to think shrinking your party to 3 and shoehorning in some kind of crazy system (complete with an acronym for its ridiculous name) is some kind of advancement. How does reducing my options and then adding a bunch of special effects any kind of improvement?

I like SRPG's alot, but that is a whole different ballgame. They are more about grid based combat with semi-generic units then regular RPGs. The JRPG is a stagnant and dieing format, and by abandoning things like leveling up, forging, constant equipment upgrades, grinding, and a lack of defensive actions (Hey! I'm gonna stand here while I'm hit by a meteor!) the combat from these games could move forward. Nevermind the narrative problems. That is an entirely different issue...

P.S. I think it is pretty funny how negative most people's response to this article is. You can't overlook the games mechanics (which is what this article is about) just because you like one's aesthetic and not the others.

Featured Stories

Image

Silver Lining: I Am Alive's unfeeling world

Posted on May 25th 2012 7:30PM

Image

Game Of Thrones and the paradoxes of adaptation

Posted on May 25th 2012 5:00PM

Engadget

Engadget

TUAW

TUAW

Massively

Massively

WoW

WoW