I’ve been thinking about the RPG genre lately because it’s my favorite type of game. But I’ve also noticed how a lot of RPGs that are fun to play still possess quite banal stories(Tales of Symphonia comes to mind). So which would say was the number one priority for an RPG? Having fun characters(Thousand Arms)? Having a gripping battle system(FFVII)? Or having a great story(Xenogears)? I don’t recall too many games that got all three areas right and balanced. The last game that I’ve played that did that was Knights of the Old Republic. I’ve also been thinking about the differences between western and eastern RPGs. Most RPGs are eastern. They seem to recycle the most common traditions and archetypes because its easy to do and makes the characters easier to understand. They seem to focus more on combat. Western RPGs on the other hand seem to focus on giving out as many quests as possible, delving deep into the souls of the characters, and on story. Of course a lot has changed since Final Fantasy VII, so anime style RPGs are getting a lot more varied, but I still see nuggets of elements being overused. I often wonder how a gamer chooses a game and which element he deems the most important to make that choice.
Story, all the way. If the game does not have a good story, it will bore you to death and you won’t care to finish it or not. The main thing I LOVED about PDS, is that the story was very mature and didn’t treat the player(s) like they were a bunch of fucking idiots. Another good thing was there wasn’t any cute and sappy moments (god I hate those!) and everything was serious. I wish there were more games like this, but, unfortunately, that’s not going to happen because the masses truly are a braindead bunch, and the games being released nowadays are specifically aimed at that intellectually challenged group.
I’ve said this before, but my game theory is that each game can be broken down into two major components: system and narrative. A game can be all system and no narrative (Tetris), but it cannot be all narrative and no system (that would be a movie). From that perspective, you could argue that for any game, the system (i.e. gameplay) is the most important factor, given that it is the medium’s differentiating element.
That being said, only a few RPGs have succeeded in creating primarily system-based RPGs that keep gamers playing for extended periods of time (namely Diablo). That would suggest that either a) RPGs are just too long to keep people’s interest, or b) people who buy RPGs are primarily interested in story, albeit with the occasional exception.
So, given that bit, one could also argue that since RPG fans are mostly interested in story, that could be the most important factor.
In other words, the answer to your question is: yes. 
RPGs in both eastern and western cultures have evolved into very different beasts. With Japanese RPGs, it simply isn’t an RPG unless the main character has spiky black hair and there are a lot of religious references 
Okay, that’s a bit of an exaggeration, but I’m sure you all understand where I’m coming from. Particularly with the big 2 (DQ and FF), Japanese gamers return to those games time and time again because they know what to expect. They don’t like to spend a lot of time gaming, but if they do, they want to make sure it’s something that they’re going to enjoy.
But, to go back even further, the start of JRPGs was DQ1, which was a simplified version of D&D. The designer didn’t think the Famicom was capable of having very complex systems and gamers in Japan weren’t really ready for the complicated nature of D&D, so he simplified it as much as possible, and that’s what they got. That element still exists today, in most RPGs (though some RPGs try to differentiate themselves by being exceedingly complicated).
In the west, however, RPGs have evolved on PC where gamers expect a much higher level of interactivity… and where gamers were intimately more familiar with the complex mechanics of paper & pencil RPGs.
Japanese gamers look for familiarity, interesting character designs, a very narrow but fine-tuned experience, etc, whereas a lot of western gamers look for customization, broad stroke experiences, and whatnot. Of course this is all a generalization, but nevertheless.
I have some catching up to do, even though I feel RPGs have kind of peaked now.
Stepping into the shoes of a character whom you can role play in any manner you choose is one of the most important aspects for me. It beats living vicariously through someone else.
Playing as Revan’s right hand general in KOTOR2 opened up a whole world of possibilities. You could play as either the misunderstood noble protector, or as a bloodthirsty bastard who went to war to quench that endless thirst.
Being given a voice with which to steer the course of the story is the most important thing to me now. Different strokes for different folks though. Morrowind offered a boundless world for the explorers among us to enjoy on top of non-restrictive customisation.
You can’t really ask for much more now tbh except for graphics that go further and further into the realm of true realism/surrealism.
[quote=“Abadd”]
I’ve said this before, but my game theory is that each game can be broken down into two major components: system and narrative. A game can be all system and no narrative (Tetris), but it cannot be all narrative and no system (that would be a movie). From that perspective, you could argue that for any game, the system (i.e. gameplay) is the most important factor, given that it is the medium’s differentiating element.
That being said, only a few RPGs have succeeded in creating primarily system-based RPGs that keep gamers playing for extended periods of time (namely Diablo). That would suggest that either a) RPGs are just too long to keep people’s interest, or b) people who buy RPGs are primarily interested in story, albeit with the occasional exception.
So, given that bit, one could also argue that since RPG fans are mostly interested in story, that could be the most important factor.
In other words, the answer to your question is: yes.
RPGs in both eastern and western cultures have evolved into very different beasts. With Japanese RPGs, it simply isn’t an RPG unless the main character has spiky black hair and there are a lot of religious references Okay, that’s a bit of an exaggeration, but I’m sure you all understand where I’m coming from. Particularly with the big 2 (DQ and FF), Japanese gamers return to those games time and time again because they know what to expect. They don’t like to spend a lot of time gaming, but if they do, they want to make sure it’s something that they’re going to enjoy.
But, to go back even further, the start of JRPGs was DQ1, which was a simplified version of D&D. The designer didn’t think the Famicom was capable of having very complex systems and gamers in Japan weren’t really ready for the complicated nature of D&D, so he simplified it as much as possible, and that’s what they got. That element still exists today, in most RPGs (though some RPGs try to differentiate themselves by being exceedingly complicated).
In the west, however, RPGs have evolved on PC where gamers expect a much higher level of interactivity… and where gamers were intimately more familiar with the complex mechanics of paper & pencil RPGs.
Japanese gamers look for familiarity, interesting character designs, a very narrow but fine-tuned experience, etc, whereas a lot of western gamers look for customization, broad stroke experiences, and whatnot. Of course this is all a generalization, but nevertheless.[/quote]
I agree with this wholeheartedly. Its funny now to see a major japanese studio like Sega trying to create RPGS from both sides of the game industry,it will be interesting to say the least to play a western RPG and a JRPG coming from the same company.
You can write the best story you want - if the battle system is a pain to play for me, I will not buy your game.
[quote=“Geoffrey Duke”]I have some catching up to do, even though I feel RPGs have kind of peaked now.
Stepping into the shoes of a character whom you can role play in any manner you choose is one of the most important aspects for me. It beats living vicariously through someone else.
Playing as Revan’s right hand general in KOTOR2 opened up a whole world of possibilities. You could play as either the misunderstood noble protector, or as a bloodthirsty bastard who went to war to quench that endless thirst.
Being given a voice with which to steer the course of the story is the most important thing to me now. Different strokes for different folks though. Morrowind offered a boundless world for the explorers among us to enjoy on top of non-restrictive customisation.
You can’t really ask for much more now tbh except for graphics that go further and further into the realm of true realism/surrealism.[/quote]
Just wondering, have you seen the videos for Mass Effect? I know it’s technically a shooter with RPG elements, but it really looks to raise the bar for how characters interact. Not only are the facial movements a lot more realistic than KOTOR and Jade Empire, but now you can reply to a person before they’ve finished speaking. For me, this is a big improvement to the standard RPG conversation system. In real life, people don’t wait for the other person to finish speaking - we tend to butt in. Imagine a scene where you can choose to intimidate the person you’re confronting with interrogating questions and while they’re stuttering away their excuse, you can pull a gun to their face in real time and the character will react accordingly. That scene was in the video, actually.
I certainly can relate to that.
By the way, welcome back Squirrel Master.
Welcome back, Senor!
As for your comment, I think it points out that both system and story are just as important. If you’re playing a game that has a great story but a really stupid/boring system, you may as well just watch a movie. For it to be a good game, it needs a compelling system, just as it needs a compelling narrative.
To me the most important aspects to a RPG are, the story and the cast of characters, with out a story a cast of characters I even remotely care about, I’m not going to bother with the game. Then a overlooked part to me is the music, If I?m going to spend hrs on end in a RPG then the music better sound good and not become irritating, and it?s aslo an bonus if the world you?re exploring looks nice and interesting too.
Of course the battle system is important , but if you don?t get the story or characters right , I?m not even going to care much for the Battle system or the game no matter how good is , and to be fair most battle system these days are pretty good, thanks to the rule book is now so well established.
One part I would like to see the back of this gen is the end to the loading times between battles , add in loading times , and frequent random battles and that can kill any RPG no matter how good it is .
I?m a fan of Albert Oddesy on the Saturn , nice story, decent set of characters and a memorizing music score, but boy did the loading times and the endless battles do my nut in, I know you they?re a integral of RPG?s but they almost killed the game for me , it almost did the same for SOA. But that?s games vision cast of characters and story made me want to see it , to the end .
Have to say even after all these years Lunar on the Mega CD yet to be matched (for me) Best story, best set of characters and one of the greatest music score ever written .
Also I wish RPG’s would go back to 40 to 20 hrs of gameplay, I haven’t the time or the will to play through many 80+ Hrs RPG’s these days. RGP’s go on for far too long , plus a short RPG helps me remember the story far better
Pretty simple : if it’s a linear RPG (most RPGs I like are linear) I can often play bad gameplay if there’s good story but not the other way around.
But if it’s a non-linear RPG then gameplay should be the one and only focus seeing as how the story is pretty much what you make of it.Here the gameplay aspect is much more important.
TA - You’re avatar is weirding me out… I just had dinner with Ueda-san and it’s just odd seeing that picture right after 
I’ll take it off it’s doing toy head in that much mate, But you have to understand the man’s a hero to me, up there with Jackie Chan , Michael Schumacher and Tom Savini as all time Gods (yes I have no life :)) and I Worship the ground they walk on . You don?t know how lucky you are meeting GOD?s like Ueda.
I thought I was in GOD?s pocket meeting most of the Cardiff City players (my brother runs the supporters club ) and even marching with the Team on playoff day . I?ll most prob pass out, or have Heart failure if I ever were to meet the likes of Ueda .
Oh well , hope you and the Team are having a nice time 
I want to avoid getting an X Box 360, but I’m really looking forward to Mass Effect. And for those who miss the Baldur’s Gate style Bioware, Dragon Age looks like it’ll be good for the PC. You get to create your character, your “origin story”, and based upon origin, you get assigned an arch rival. They’ve also tweaked the good and evil elements. No longer will good characters go along with your methods if you’re of the evil persuasion.
RPG’s in their videogame incarnation are a pretty strange breed. For many people it seems clear that the system is a technicality, only there to seal the illusion of accomplishment. As long as pressing some buttons results in “winning” then you get to feel like a badass right?
In that sense I think the system can be pretty irrelevant in an RPG… or at least that’s my take on it since I find most traditional RPG battles to be really tiresome and irrelevant. So there’s clearly an audience for whom the story is everything, since there’s so many RPG’s in which the system is nothing.
That said I think the importance of either can vary greatly according to how the game is set up. I really loved Skies of Arcadia in so many ways, but I never did finish it because I got distracted long enough that I wanted to start over, yet I couldn’t bear the thought of all that empty and tedious fighting again. The story is where the game was most successful, yet the system was by default more important to me because you had to spend so much time in repetetive battles. Unfortunately the system at that level was weak. By contrast a game like Enchant Arms has a totally weak story, yet is still compelling purely for the system.
So just personally an RPG can potentially succeed only on the system, but never on only the story.
That ones hard, although I think story is incredibly important and either makes or breaks the game for me I do think it should have interesting characters who aid the story to make it better and a good battle system is important because you feel like you actually want to play the game rather than just get through the annoying battles to get to cutscenes. PDS and Final Fantasy X have all three and they tie in as my favourite games of all time (I can have 2 fav games right? ). I have heard good things about Dragon Quest (the recent one for PS2) storyline wise but I played a demo and I hated the battle system and the characters just looked like annoying people so that really put me off. So although storyline is the most important you can’t just have a great story with a crappy battle system and stupid characters.
People talk about how important story is to RPGs, and yet there are only a couple of RPGs that genuinely have good stories. The vast majority of RPGs (even western ones) are fairly generic in content, even if the presentation is handled well. As much as I like the KOTOR series, can you really say that the stories are that great? They’re great in the context of the Star Wars universe, but do they have universal appeal? Do you walk away from those games with the feeling that you have been emotionally affected by the game, like what happens when you read a good book or watch a good movie?
That happens very rarely with video games. Not because the medium can’t do it, but because most people don’t demand it of the genre.
[quote=“Abadd”]People talk about how important story is to RPGs, and yet there are only a couple of RPGs that genuinely have good stories. The vast majority of RPGs (even western ones) are fairly generic in content, even if the presentation is handled well. As much as I like the KOTOR series, can you really say that the stories are that great? They’re great in the context of the Star Wars universe, but do they have universal appeal? Do you walk away from those games with the feeling that you have been emotionally affected by the game, like what happens when you read a good book or watch a good movie?
That happens very rarely with video games. Not because the medium can’t do it, but because most people don’t demand it of the genre.[/quote]
I never though KOTOR was that good myself Hides. I loved Fable the most when it came to Western RPG’s .
I know the point you’re saying, its just like flims inthe sence that most of the story’s and plots have been done before in some shape or another . But a film or RPG with out a story, I care out about (or should that read I’m Interested in) or a cast of characters I care about is going to be me off, from the very start (thats what killed FF7 for me) .
That said the world and gameplay needs to Interest me too, Thats why I loved Fable so much (even with its leak story) It was just a joy to walk around the place half the time, and the music was perfect (a overlooked part of any RPG). Then again Grandia II didn’t have the best story, but I love the characters , and the Battle system still for me remains the best ever in a RPG.
[quote=“Abadd”]People talk about how important story is to RPGs, and yet there are only a couple of RPGs that genuinely have good stories. The vast majority of RPGs (even western ones) are fairly generic in content, even if the presentation is handled well. As much as I like the KOTOR series, can you really say that the stories are that great? They’re great in the context of the Star Wars universe, but do they have universal appeal? Do you walk away from those games with the feeling that you have been emotionally affected by the game, like what happens when you read a good book or watch a good movie?
That happens very rarely with video games. Not because the medium can’t do it, but because most people don’t demand it of the genre.[/quote]
So right you are. The ONLY RPG (that I’ve ever played) that has a really good story and really inspired me was Panzer Dragoon Saga – everything was detailed like something out of an epic novel; this is the way games are meant to be, but aren’t simply because 99.9% of the people who make videogames are people with mediocre minds, and thus games with medicority stamped all over them is the result.
I’m not saying that there aren’t alot of really good games out there – there are. But PDS is the only game I’ve ever played that left me satisfied AND insatiable at the same time – there has never been a game that has been able to create that same effect on me before or since.
This medium has always been the best for storytelling, but it’s not exploited because most developers are lazy, don’t like what they do, and are only in it for the money. Rule of thumb: whenever money is the goal, imagination will be non-existent - and it’s that what is lacking in almost all of today’s games.
So how many developers do you know, to form such an opinion, and what do you think made the members of TA so different since they also were in similar corporate environments as everyone else, especially with being members of such a large company.
Now, gramted, a company’s purpose is to make money, but the people that create the games, well, I’ll just say that none of the people I know were the kind of person that said “oh I know, I’ll become a 3D artist (or whatever else) to make big bucks as a game developer”. You are simply delusional if you think that’s how it goes, especially considering most of those people get shit paychecks even if the games they worked on are succesful.
I guess it shouldn’t surprise me that your view of the world and how things work in a given environment is so twisted.
Come on Alex, it’s just a paycheque to most people. Face it. I don’t care for their excuses either. People who film rape porn have to pay bills too. Do you share the same sympathy for them?
No Chris, I still need to check out Mass Effect. My curiosity isn’t really piqued to be honest because now that the industry has gone down the mass market path, there’s no going back.
A truly grand story would be alien to most people without having at least something in common with a soap opera.
You could probably count the list of common themes in RPGs today on your fingers. Let’s see: revenge, amnesia, a lost love, unrequited love, conquest, redemption etc etc. Basically things that relate to the fundamental human condition.
It’s just impossible not to relate. Vigilante justice? Oh yeah! Whatever. Delving into why there’s no justice in the world would be far more thought provoking material, but that would mean not living out a dream vicariously through someone who takes the law into their own hands. That’s just more empowering.
While the industry molds its games around the tastes of brain dead zombies, don’t expect anything profound to come out of it.