What Are You Playing, Part 3: The Assassination of my Wallet by the Cowardly Sale

[Zombimode]

JRPG for WRPG refers to actual gameplay differences, not aesthetic ones. There are Japanese made WRPGs (like Dragon's Dogma) and Western made JRPGs (like the South Park games).

Ok, but what exactly ARE those differences?

[PoeticallyPsyco]

About that: is there actually any profound meaning behind those terms?
At least whenever I search for definitions for western rpgs and jrpgs respectively the only thing I find is a lack of knowledge of games in those people making the definitions.

I'm sure someone already answered this, but here's a good video I recently watched on the subject:


The really short version is that early RPGs had their roots in D&D, but the genre diverged early on, with western RPGs focusing on character customization (and kind of by extension letting you choose your own path) while the Japanese RPGs focused on telling a more rigid story (but still with mechanics originally inspired by D&D). Since then they've continued to drift and evolve, but that initial split has left a definite impression on both genres.

[Rynjin]

Ok, but what exactly ARE those differences?

See above, it's basically what I would have said. JRPGs are about plot and characters first, mechanics second; which is why most tend to still be rigidly turn based as well. WRPGs are somewhat the opposite, with a focus on choice and consequences over raw narrative.

It's an almost even split between "curated experience" (JRPGs, which have a linear plot and usually locked in level progression) and "player agency" (WRPGs, which have a focus on narrative choices with an overall simpler/shorter plot and generally encourage "builds) design philosophies.

[Anonymouswizard]

Ok, but what exactly ARE those differences?

WRPGs have you play a role, with emphasis given to player choice. That might be an TES-style 'you can choose which quest lines to follow' or Bioware-style 'there is one quest, but you can change the details of how it plays out'. Very likely to feature in-depth customisation of characters, sometimes enough to form a barrier to entry. Arguably this genre reached it's peak with the release of Planescape: Torment, which would often offer ten or more dialogue options and changed your alignment for being truthful or deceptive (marked by the [lie] tag).

JRPGs are focused on a linear story with a set cast of characters. Mostly linear, some games will branch into somewhat different routes for the endgame. It's almost certainly going to have a set main character and cast who you may or may not be able to customise stats and ability-wise, and any dialogue trees will be relatively simple and have less importance (although are likely the way you'll determine your route).

In TTRPG terms, a WRPG is anywhere from a sandbox to a railroad, whereas in a JRPG you're handed a pregenerated character and railroaded, but hopefully through a good story. Not that there aren'tWRPGs that only let you play a pregenerated character, but it's the easiest analogy to make.

[LibraryOgre]

So, here's my thing:

Elder Scrolls is an RPG, because you create your character.
Mass Effect is not an RPG, but an adventure game. Because while it has some RPG elements, you're always playing Commander Shepherd (or Pathfinder Ryder*)

They are extremely similar in other respects; your Shepard and my Shepard may look nothing alike... I may come from a military family, have high moral standards, and have awesome biotic powers, you may be a pragmatic street bully who likes to shoot people... but the game still reacts to us as Commander Shepard.

In Elder Scrolls, who my character is is a blank slate. I may be any race. I may have any array of abilities (but will probably be a sword-n-board spellcaster, because I'm me). There may be roles that I am thrust into... I may be Dragonborn, Nevarine, or the Agent. I may decide to become part of any number of guilds. But who I am is never defined by the background of the game, rather by the events of the game.

It's what keeps Quest for Glory an adventure game, not an RPG, though it's trying REALLY HARD to make that jump.

[GloatingSwine]

So, here's my thing:

Elder Scrolls is an RPG, because you create your character.
Mass Effect is not an RPG, but an adventure game. Because while it has some RPG elements, you're always playing Commander Shepherd (or Pathfinder Ryder*)

I could argue the exact opposite, of course. Elder Scrolls is not an RPG because the world does not respond to the differences in your character. Although there are in principle different ways you could approach being a character in that world, the world won't notice or care which one you actually do.

Whereas the decisions you make as "Commander Shepherd" will be noticed and responded to by the game and alter the way it responds to your character, and so you have far more opportunity to roleplay in a way that matters.

[Eldan]

Yeah, personally, I'd call Mass Effect far more of an RPG than Elder Scrolls. Because Mass Effect puts much more weight on story, characters and choices that interact in massive ways with both. If a companion dies in Skyrim, I shrug and get a new one. Maybe be a bit annoyed because they made some fun complaints. If I whiff the suicide mission in Mass Effect 2, I may reload and replay the last two hours because I can't possibly see those friends die. People will talk about your choices in Mass Effect. Planets and fleets and entire species may die. In Skyrim, the banner colour in a town may change, but otherwise, everything is the same.

(That brings me back to Disco Elysium. I once replayed an entire questline because I failed a skill check and called my (Asian) partner a racist slur. Multiple times. It was so mortifying that I had to switch off immediately. Doesn't happen in Skyrim.)

[Zombimode]

It's an almost even split between "curated experience" (JRPGs, which have a linear plot and usually locked in level progression) and "player agency" (WRPGs, which have a focus on narrative choices with an overall simpler/shorter plot and generally encourage "builds) design philosophies.

Now that is something I can understand.
And thinking of games that usually get one of the labels it seems to fit.

It's a much better explantion than the usual "jrpgs focus on story and characters (with the implication that wrgps don't) and wrpgs on mechanics (with the implication that jrpgs don't)" which is just blatantly false in both regards.

[Anonymouswizard]

Elder Scrolls is an RPG, because you create your character.
Mass Effect is not an RPG, but an adventure game. Because while it has some RPG elements, you're always playing Commander Shepherd (or Pathfinder Ryder*)

Then what's Disco Elysium? I mean, it has nothing at all in common with adventure games, except the large collection of hats and tools I ended up lugging around in my back pockets as I went about preaching about how sorry I was that the apocalypse was coming...

[Anteros]

Then what's Disco Elysium? I mean, it has nothing at all in common with adventure games, except the large collection of hats and tools I ended up lugging around in my back pockets as I went about preaching about how sorry I was that the apocalypse was coming...

I haven't played it, but from my understanding it seems more like an interactive novel than anything else.

[Man_Over_Game]

I haven't played it, but from my understanding it seems more like an interactive novel than anything else.

Which means we're now defining the line between "Role Playing" and "Game".

[Cespenar]

Fellas, I tried to (though offhandedly) warn against the RPG definition blackhole, but you all didn't listen.

[LibraryOgre]

Then what's Disco Elysium? I mean, it has nothing at all in common with adventure games, except the large collection of hats and tools I ended up lugging around in my back pockets as I went about preaching about how sorry I was that the apocalypse was coming...

"New fangled"

Seriously, I play very few games that aren't pushing 10 years old; Kingmaker happened because my brother bought it for me.

Fellas, I tried to (though offhandedly) warn against the RPG definition blackhole, but you all didn't listen.

It's one of those things that is so amorphous, that has been used to cover so many different things, that it's hard to pin down in any satisfying way.

[Anonymouswizard]

"New fangled"

Seriously, I play very few games that aren't pushing 10 years old; Kingmaker happened because my brother bought it for me.

To be fair, six to eight years seems to be the cutoff for me, partially due to harder and partially because there's so many more decade old games I actually want to play than anything else. The occasional newer game, such as Disco Elysium or (checks release date) The Age of Decadence slips through, but most of those don't hold me for very long.

On that note, finished the Law Route of Shin Megami Tensei IV (because I'm doing the three main endings from worst to best, Chaos will be next), so it's time to buy Strange Journey Redux and play what was originally going to be IV. Honestly the main problem is the lack of a defence stat, the battles are fast but you're taking twice as much damage as in previous games without (much) additional hp, which means that the RNG can do you in more easily.

[Triaxx]

@Warty, if you haven't tried it, Grim Dawn is a great game similar to Sacred.

As for the RPG fight, if i consider it and RPG it is. That's my feeling.

[Eldan]

I haven't played it, but from my understanding it seems more like an interactive novel than anything else.

It's absolutely not, as far as I'm concerned. It has character building, levelling up, quests and tons and tons and tons of skill checks. I'd say that it's an electronic game of FATE where Baldur's Gate is an electronic game of AD&D.

[Zombimode]

To be honest the lack of combat in Disco Elysium is the only thing that has kept me away from it but I will play it eventually.

On topic and more in line with Mark Halls type: I've now started Dark Sun: Shattered Lands in earnest.

Does passage of time matters in this game? Timed quests, events? I couldn't even find any information concerning the time of day, so maybe there is no passage of time other then effect duration.

[LibraryOgre]

To be honest the lack of combat in Disco Elysium is the only thing that has kept me away from it but I will play it eventually.

On topic and more in line with Mark Halls type: I've now started Dark Sun: Shattered Lands in earnest.

Does passage of time matters in this game? Timed quests, events? I couldn't even find any information concerning the time of day, so maybe there is no passage of time other then effect duration.

I don't recall time mattering at all. However: Those bracelets you get with psionic powers? They can be used like scrolls to learn psionic powers.

Spoiler: Little spoiler: a way to get money

Show

There's also a guy who, while brainwashed, will buy tons of broken pots for ridiculous amounts of money (for Shattered Lands). You can take advantage of that if you like.

[Cespenar]

It's one of those things that is so amorphous, that has been used to cover so many different things, that it's hard to pin down in any satisfying way.

While the definition arguments themselves are a bit pointless (IMHO), it's a good sign for gaming if we have trouble slapping a tag to a game. It attests to the medium's originality and evolution.

[Anonymouswizard]

To be honest the lack of combat in Disco Elysium is the only thing that has kept me away from it but I will play it eventually.

Having played Planescape: Torment, the lack of combat is a plus. Disco Elysium is the very same kind of dialogue-heavy RPG, and any combat would be just as bad as the battles in Torment.

[Eldan]

Disco Elysium does have combat. It's done entirely through dialogue and skill checks. And preparation.

[Rodin]

While the definition arguments themselves are a bit pointless (IMHO), it's a good sign for gaming if we have trouble slapping a tag to a game. It attests to the medium's originality and evolution.

This is why I like multiple-tag systems like the one Steam uses. If you tell me a game is an RPG, that definition is useless and tells me nothing. If you tell me a game is a RPG Rogue-like Soulslike Third-person Action game, that gives me a solid baseline for what to expect. At that point I can read a more in-depth description of the game and decide whether I'm interested or not.

One tag (or two, like "Action RPG") may not be descriptive enough to describe a game or even a genre. Five tags is generally enough to narrow down the buckets. Even then there are games that defy description like Disco Elysium, but genre-busters like that tend to make a big enough splash that you learn about them anyway.

[warty goblin]

@Warty, if you haven't tried it, Grim Dawn is a great game similar to Sacred.

As for the RPG fight, if i consider it and RPG it is. That's my feeling.

I've played some Grim Dawn, and liked it pretty well. It's missing the sense of place in Sacred - all the peasants and villages and stuff - and there's something weirdly appealing about picking a character at the beginning. Like Grim Dawn's (read Titan Quest's) pick-two-classes system is really cool and super flexible and I like it, but there's something innately satisfying to me about picking a particular character and being like "I am going to seraphim everybody to death right in the face. And look wicked doing it."

Also, I've been playing the game since it originally released, so the comparison is not even close to fair.

[factotum]

Like Grim Dawn's (read Titan Quest's) pick-two-classes system is really cool and super flexible and I like it, but there's something innately satisfying to me about picking a particular character and being like "I am going to seraphim everybody to death right in the face. And look wicked doing it."

To be fair, you pick your first character class at level 2, which only requires a few zombie kills to reach, and even though you can pick a second class at level 10, there's nothing to say you actually have to do that--you could have effectively a single-classed Grim Dawn character from pretty much the beginning of the game. As for peasants, there are a few of them around, but certainly not as many as Sacred--guess the entire world having gone through an apocalypse will have that effect on things, though!

[Triaxx]

Agreed, though it's more comparing Apples to pears than oranges. Similar look, similar texture, totally different flavors.

Really enjoying GD, so far only encountered a couple challenges... And then a sudden surprise in Forgotten Gods.

[tonberrian]

Been playing through kingmaker, as my good lappy blows up the day my backup arrives - thank you steam cloud saves! I'm at the point where I should take a break from the main game and finish up Varnhold's Lot if i want to bring anything over. It's pretty much exactly what I wanted (and notably DIDN'T GET) out of NWN2. After throwing down another 30 hours on this, have to wonder if my D&D itch got scratched, or if i want to go on to Baldur's Gate Enhanced.

[Cespenar]

This is why I like multiple-tag systems like the one Steam uses. If you tell me a game is an RPG, that definition is useless and tells me nothing. If you tell me a game is a RPG Rogue-like Soulslike Third-person Action game, that gives me a solid baseline for what to expect. At that point I can read a more in-depth description of the game and decide whether I'm interested or not.

One tag (or two, like "Action RPG") may not be descriptive enough to describe a game or even a genre. Five tags is generally enough to narrow down the buckets. Even then there are games that defy description like Disco Elysium, but genre-busters like that tend to make a big enough splash that you learn about them anyway.

One factor I'm noticing on myself is that I see (and look for) less and less tags and genres and whatnot because of the ease of looking at screenshots or a clip instead. In the "olden days", we had to rely on an article on a magazine describing the game with genres, but nowadays you just pop up a clip at your leisure and get all the information you could get in a heartbeat. Even in Steam, the tags only serve now to bring "likelier" games to my attention (and often failing miserably, by the way) but I never end up looking for them myself.

[Man_Over_Game]

If you tell me a game is a RPG Rogue-like Soulslike Third-person Action game, that gives me a solid baseline for what to expect. At that point I can read a more in-depth description of the game and decide whether I'm interested or not.

Makes me wonder what kind of games you could only really describe in reference to another game.

For example, is Hollow Knight enough like Dark Souls that you could only really describe it in contrast to Dark Souls? I'd say not. "Hardcore Horror Platform Action Adventure RPG" would just about cover exactly what you'd need to know.

However, the same isn't true when describing Path of Exile against Diablo. You could try to describe it in a bunch of words, but it wouldn't compare to just saying "Diablo, but...".

You could probably identify the world's most original games this way. Mario Kart, Diablo, Zelda, Metroidvania, etc. Games with gameplay that's so successful and fun that even years later the original's gameplay captured the key components that modern games continue to emulate.

I'd be interested to see what kind of modern games would fall into this (that is, a game that effectively started its own genre for future devs to follow suit).

Portal comes to mind, but even that can be succinctly put as "First Person Physics Puzzle Game", which had been done before its time (just not very well).

The Sims, and Minecraft. Those are about the only ones I can think of right now (with The Sims mostly just not having any real competitors in the genre).

[Rodin]

Makes me wonder what kind of games you could only really describe in reference to another game.

For example, is Hollow Knight enough like Dark Souls that you could only really describe it in contrast to Dark Souls? I'd say not. "Hardcore Horror Platform Action Adventure RPG" would just about cover exactly what you'd need to know.

That's because Hollow Knight isn't a Souls-like, at least in terms of gameplay. It takes storytelling cues from Dark Souls, but nothing else about the game resembles the Souls series. Try describing Salt and Sanctuary without referencing Dark Souls. You can just about get there, in the same way that Legend of Zelda is a "Top-down Action Adventure Puzzle game". It's still much faster to say "Metroidvania Soulslike". Those two words describe 99% of the mechanics in that game.

I also wouldn't describe Hollow Knight as Horror, but that's an entirely different argument.

I'd be interested to see what kind of modern games would fall into this (that is, a game that effectively started its own genre for future devs to follow suit).

Portal comes to mind, but even that can be succinctly put as "First Person Physics Puzzle Game", which had been done before its time (just not very well).

The Sims, and Minecraft. Those are about the only ones I can think of right now (with The Sims mostly just not having any real competitors in the genre).

Dark Souls and Slay the Spire. Both games have attracted so many imitators that they have effectively created their own genre.

The Soulslike tag is misused quite a bit. Dead Cells and Hollow Knight both show up on lists for it, and neither have a similar gameplay loop. People often refer to games with dark themes and minimal storytelling as "Souls-likes", but to my mind you have to hew a lot closer to the original to count. There are still a bunch that count - Sekiro, Remnant, The Surge, Code Vein, Nioh, Ashen, Salt and Sanctuary, and others I'm sure I'm forgetting.

[Cespenar]

Dark Souls and Slay the Spire. Both games have attracted so many imitators that they have effectively created their own genre.

It doesn't attest to their originality, but rather their success, though. You can define both games with just as much descriptors as any other game, and the only thing that would be stopping you would be their avid fans going "no, but it's so much more than that!".