/v2/ - The King's Vidya

>Souls games
>JRPG
>ARPG
>can only pick one
But they're both, you fucking friend

>>30
>JRPG just because it's made in Japan

Here we go again.
JRPG is (more or less, with some minor differences) turn-based RPG usually with an over-world map and almost completely linear progression. Dark Souls has absolutely none of these, even post-Anor Londo, the player is free to complete any part they want in any order they want.

>>33
JRPG describes no more about a game than "anime" describes an art style or "indie" describes a band's sound. It's just an umbrella term used to denote an aspect of the game (that it's made in Japan) that people began using to erroneously describe gameplay. A JRPG can feature any type of battle system, any art style, and any kind of aesthetic, as long as it's made in Japan. Using JRPG as anything more than a term to describe a game's country of origin is misleading and wrong.

>almost completely linear progression
Is FFVI not a JRPG due to its latter half?

>>34
That's ridiculous. FFVI's battle system doesn't change in the middle of the game, so why would that matter?

What the fuck is the point calling anything WRPG or JRPG if they don't stereotypically always have the same playstyles (which they do). It's just that Japan is now finally starting to make RPGs that have a completely different playstyle to other JRPGs that people are getting confused about the genre category names. It isn't called JRPG because it's made in Japan, that's just what they were called because Japan didn't fucking make any other kind of RPG. It's a genre in and of itself.

I can't even think of western-developed games right off the top of my head that are styled like JRPGs, which is why the stereotypical "WRPG" category that Morrowind and company fall under. WRPG are more sandboxey, JRPG are more linear. That's the only distinction, not by the country they were created in.

>>37
>FFVI's battle system doesn't change in the middle of the game, so why would that matter?
What does the battle system have to do with anything? A JRPG can have any kind of battle system.

>What the fuck is the point calling anything WRPG or JRPG
To marginalize and generalize Japanese RPGs. Go dig up some old reviews of JRPGs prior to gen 7, they were almost always called RPGs by the press, without the "J", because it was irrelevant where they were from.

>stereotypically always have the same playstyles
FF plays differently from Tales which plays differently from Atelier which plays differently from Fire Emblem with plays differently from Kingdom Hearts which plays differently from Parasite Eve etc. etc. JRPG is not a gameplay style, it's an RPG from Japan.

>I can't even think of western-developed games right off the top of my head that are styled like JRPGs
Child of Light, Black Sigil, Secret of Evermore

>WRPG are more sandboxey, JRPG are more linear.
While this is generally the case, an open world JRPG is still a JRPG. FFXV promises to be open world, is Final Fantasy suddenly no longer a Japanese RPG? FFVI is open world after the World of Balance, is it not a JRPG?

>>38
>Parasite Eve
>a JRPG
You know, I'm not really sure WHAT to call Parasite Eve. I've never played anything quite like it. If I had to pick a genre for it, it'd be fixed-camera TPS with RPG elements.

>Atelier
Only played Annie, so all I can say about this is that it's unique, but not much different from other JRPGs. Maybe JRPG with some SRPG elements? Been a long time since I played so that's probably wrong.

>Fire Emblem
Turn Based Strategy or SRPG, not a whole lot of RPG about it, though. Level up gains are dice rolls.

>Kingdom Hearts
ARPG, chain of memories being a very unique ARPG

Others I haven't really played so I cannot comment, but looking at videos of Child of Light and Black Sigil, yeah those are JRPG.

>>39
ARPG, SRPG, etc. are all subgenres of RPGs. JRPG is not a subgenre but an umbrella term to describe an RPG from a specific part of the world. FE is a JRPG in the SRPG subgenre, KH is a JRPG in the ARPG subgenre, and Souls is a JRPG in the ARPG subgenre. JRPG and ARPG/SRPG/etc. are not exclusive terms. Once you understand that it becomes a lot more clear.

>>40
But Child of Light and Black Sigil are obviously JRPGs, so what genre would those fall under? Western JRPG? Western Japanese, when it isn't from Japan? It's a JRPG, there's no other name for that genre.

Your logic is flawed. A blanket term for country (having nothing to do with the gameplay, since games with even remotely RPG elements must suddenly subscribe to this JRPG title) is stupid. I guess Zelda is a JRPG too?

Umbrella terms used for country is stupid and only creates confusion. You don't hear anyone calling Fallout:NV a URPG because it was made in the United States.

>>40
Also, they aren't really subgenre. Dark Souls plays COMPLETELY differently to Disgaea or Fire Emblem, but because they're all made in Japan LOL THEY'RE ALL JRPG.

>>41
Child of Light is an ARPG, Black Sigil is a turn-based RPG. Just because they aren't nonlinear open-world games doesn't mean they are suddenly from Japan.

>I guess Zelda is a JRPG too?
Zelda isn't an RPG in general, except for Zelda II (if your definition of RPG is loose). But if it were, yes, it would be a JRPG.

>Umbrella terms used for country is stupid and only creates confusion
I agree, blame the Western press.

>>42
>Dark Souls plays COMPLETELY differently to Disgaea or Fire Emblem, but because they're all made in Japan LOL THEY'RE ALL JRPG.
Correct. What part of JRPG not having anything to do with gameplay do you not understand?

>>43
>Zelda isn't an RPG
Why not? It certainly isn't a platformer. It's not really a puzzle game. Is it one of those "Adventure" games? I could have believed that when I was 6. Is it hack and slash? I don't really think so. You increase your health (a stat) get more powerful swords (increase your strength) find new equipment to access new areas (akin to those progress walls you always find in RPGs) so why wouldn't it be an RPG, if you really think about it? I'd go as far as saying 3D ones are babbymode Dark Souls, so ARPG.

So if JRPG has nothing to do with gameplay, why does the term exist at all, and why do a LOT of RPGs that all HAPPEN to be made in Japan all share very similar playstyles? Early Final Fantasy/Golden Sun/POKEMON/ and basically everything turn-based under the sun that isn't strictly TBS.

Your usage of JRPG is too broad, and thus, meaningless.

>>44
Zelda is an action/adventure. An action/adventure is an adventure game where instead of choosing actions from a menu or pointing and clicking like pure adventure games, the player performs the action him/herself in real time. Much like an action RPG is an RPG where the player performs actions in real time instead of choosing combat commands from a menu. Zelda isn't an action RPG because it lacks RPG elements, like leveling up your character or your equipment.

>So if JRPG has nothing to do with gameplay, why does the term exist at all, and why do a LOT of RPGs that all HAPPEN to be made in Japan all share very similar playstyles?
I already answered this, it's a term coined by the Western games press to marginalize RPGs from Japan.

>Early Final Fantasy/Golden Sun/POKEMON/ and basically everything turn-based under the sun that isn't strictly TBS.
First of all, there is a huge gap between early FF and early Golden Sun/Pokemon. Secondly, there are plenty of games contemporary with early FF that play absolutely nothing like it. Crystallis is an ARPG for the NES, just for one example. There is a whole slew of early sidescrolling RPGs from that era as well. And of course there are the first-person dungeon crawlers. They all play differently from FF and are all Japanese, therefore they are all JRPGs.

>Your usage of JRPG is too broad, and thus, meaningless.
The only meaning it ever had was to denote the location on the globe where the people who made the game were sitting while making it. It's useless in a gameplay sense, I completely agree.

>>45
Then why do so many people use the term the way I use it? Why is this even a debate?

>>47
Because they don't remember when they were all just called RPGs and fell victim to the definition pushed by the Western gaming media, presumably. Or they just saw it being used and started blindly using it wrong as well. Again, it's the exact same thing as "indie" music.

>>49
Not in the same sense, no. I think there just isn't a better name for what video game RPGs are.

>>49
Even CRPGs aren't ACTUAL role-playing games, not really no. There's a level of freedom to true RPGs that you'll never find in video games without adaptive AI. What you trade off however, is the big thing.

The tradeoff is speed and time. It takes less time to play the same session/game in a video game, than it does in a tabletop role-playing game. You lose out on the freedom allowed, but gain an automated system that handles all the math for you, so it comes down to enjoying the user experience without any of the overhead to do so.