Support NeoGAF

[theclaw135]

What can I say? I found more entertainment in Pokemon Sword than any RPG that was produced by a western studio in the year 2019.

 

[cireza]

The combat and mechanics in the game are obviously like from a early 1990s SNES game.

There aren't, but you have no clue, as you obviously don't know a single game in the genre.

You can't ever "clear out" a dungeon either

You can in certain games.

Random encounters do not imply bad game. As always, there are pros and cons. Most of the games offer means to reduce them or avoid them. Even Phantasy Star II from 1989 has an item called HIDAPIPE that reduces the number of encounters.

You should really stop arguing now, all you are doing is making a show out of your total ignorance in the matter. This has been going for long enough. You should respect yourself more.

 

[10000]

the problem with jrpg nowadays is that nobody aside from square enix would pour meaningful amount of budget as it is becoming a niche genre,
hence we see the anime trope and generic theme become so prevalent

the industry shifting, but it doesn't mean that the japanese lose, they churn out many creative titles like dark souls, zelda, mario and others which won many awards. No matter how much guys could criticize japanese gaming industry it still put a special dent to me and millions other.

 

[Greedings]

They did with games like Vanquish and Resident Evil 4 and even you can argue with God Hand, which are one best games out there.

Yeah that’s kinda my point (although I hate RE4 but that’s another matter)

 

[RealGassy]

Random encounters do not imply bad game. As always, there are pros and cons. Most of the games offer means to reduce them or avoid them. Even Phantasy Star II from 1989 has an item called HIDAPIPE that reduces the number of encounters.

The pros of random encouters:
1. Easy as fuck to program. Roll a dice every couple of steps, play a stupid jingle and then force random baddies onto player.
2. Don't need to program believable monster behaviour and roaming or flocking algorithms (this is not easy to do well!)
3. Don't need artists to draw and animate sprites for monsters that roam around the dungeon. (saves ROM space on a cartridge too)
4. Don't need to make sprites for dead monsters and use computer memory to store where the dead ones are located (save file is also smaller if you don't have to save which areas have been cleared)
5. Don't even need to place the monsters when designing the dungeons. Don't have to write algorithms to procedurally generate their positions either.
6. Saves CPU/memory resources on very ancient hardware.
7. Enables to pad out total playtime of a game with bullshit. (some players consider length of the game when buying it)

Pretty much all benefis of random encounters are from developers perspective, they require zero effort, no thought or creativity to implement, greatly reduce amount of work for artists, etc. It's the simplest, most idiotic way to add combat to your game. And makes sense only on the limited hardware of NES or GB.

From a players perspective it's very hard to come up with any real pros. It's like trying to find pros of shoving a cactus up your ass.

In before some JRPG fanboy comes out of woodwork and makes the "everything is subjective, I actually quite enjoy putting cactuses up my bumhole" argument.
There's this item in Phantasy Star II called LUBE, yes, it still hurts, but the frequency of penetration is somewhat reduced! So it's okay!

Yes, a single awful mechanic doesn't necessarily always kill a game, but every other aspect has to be truly exceptional to make up for it.
If a game wants me to waste extra 20-30hrs for nothing in pointless random battles with super slow animations, it better have some masterpiece level music playing and some amazing narrative and story to make it more palatable.
Which is very, very hard to pull of and rarely if ever happens, considering JRPGs rarely have only one shitty mechanic, there's always more!

You should really stop arguing now, all you are doing is making a show out of your total ignorance in the matter. This has been going for long enough. You should respect yourself more.

It's obvious that you can't make a single good argument as you've only played dumbed-down console RPGs and have no frame of reference of what a good game looks like.

 

[cireza]

From a players perspective it's very hard to come up with any real pros.

Actually it is quite easy. I will leave it at that.

This discussion had me wonder for how long such an attitude was going be tolerated here, but it looks like it is fine, which is a bit of a surprise. I have memories of people being ban for less than that, or am I wrong ? Genuine question here. If a moderator goes through the topic, it would be nice to have some feedback.

 

[Paltheos]

Hell, the Trails games still don't get the sales they deserve because they are pretty complex games and you need to play from the beginning which is not possible for most people these days.

I don't think this is true. Definitely if you want to make the deep dive then you need to consume everything but even for the latest subseries, Cold Steel, the first game makes only passing references at the others and the second game spoils a major event in the Crossbell game but you can play Cold Steel II and still follow along with the events of the game, no problem. It looks like once you reach Cold Steel III you're pretty fucked if you haven't played the other games but you can get into them no problem.

This is actually the predicament I'm in. I want to play Cold Steel 3 but can't (although tbf I'm ok waiting for a PC port). I'm iffy on the Sky games because I think the combat is significantly worse and the Crossbell games I can't play because they were never localized and the fan work on them varies from good to functional, which is just not ok for Trails games (and if you're not rolling around in the dialogue in a Trails game you're just doing it wrong)

 

[Starlight Lotice]

First, I didn't mean you specificly in my post, i mean the whole Yakuza fandom in general, make no mistake i like the series i was there day one back in 2005, but the series was very stagnant by Y4 and was out of ideas and genuine gameplay imrovements.

I used Yakuza as an example of the hypocracy of those throwing around the term "movie" games, and I think this needs no explaination.

I think you might've missed the point behind this thread which was to list the cause of downfall of Japanese games in the eyes of the average consumer, and how that gave birth to the persecution complex some fans felt, and how now that Japan is back on it's feet both commercially and critically, there's no need for it to continue.


Arc system works, Atlus, and Tecmo Koei to name a few, take a look at every BlazBlue game ASW released and the number of DLC it got, Doa 6 has 3 THREE season passes, each sold at 99$, Atlus of course is one of the worst with their "Atlus tax" as some stupid fans liked to name them and the endless DLC for P5 that won't even carry over to P5R!

I'd like to say one thing here, no game can be successful at the scale of Fortnite, Minecraft or CoD without being a good game, it may not be your cup of tea but the masses aren't as stupid as you think and they won't continue buying/supporting these games if they weren't enjoyable.

Videogames is a business and believe me if Sega or Capcom made something that was a massive hit on the scale of CoD which they were trying to do, they would've capitalized on it and some people would've hated it with a passion just because of it's popularity and success.

Nintendo needs no defending, they're the Disney of the video games world with the most successful IP to date.

Fair enough regarding the former, but I never seen the Yakuza fandom overhype the games unless you mean the fans that got into it after 4.

Zero changed the ideas up, although I agree that 4 perhaps was treading familiar ground, I felt like Zero kind of rebooted the games a little.

What Downfall though? If you looked at Capcom's and perhaps Konami's output by that point then yes, you could say there was a downfall but I was happily enjoying Japanese games in that Era regardless of the whole "Japanese Industry is on its legs" because the Western Studios got most of the spotlight. If fans are genuinely talking about those games being superior now, then you have a point, but I think it is because those fans (who went to the most popular franchises at the time) follow the herd more or less and never took to the games the Japanese made during that era (because people said they were terrible and were trying to be western), which is why I said that the thread gives the wrong impression. I will give you credit for asking the questions though, as most wouldn't accept it but I do see some of your points.

But you are looking at one genre in particular (fighting games), and this was a thing since Street Fighter 2.

ATLUS are terrible with remaking their games within a few years, but in their case you can either wait to buy the remake, or buy the original and ignore the remake entirely. I personally don't like the practise, but it is not relatable to Micro-transactions whatsoever.

Never claimed they were stupid, nor that the games are not good. Not sure where you are going with this because Nintendo makes million sellers despite the games ranging from Excellent to Average. Although the masses DO copy other people, which I think you missed the point about. I did it myself when I was young, it's how you get your brand out.

Again, not really seeing what you are making a point about. I said myself that Videogames is a business and SEGA and Capcom capitalise on Sonic/Street Fighter all the game and people do hate those franchises in equal amounts (especially Sonic). Being Popular doesn't make it hated though, it is the direction companies take that annoys the fans that pay their hard earned money for these games and if you upset these fans then said Franchises lose their luster.

Nintendo have the most Successful IPs no doubt, but they can still be held up for accountability.