/vr/ - Retro Games

[Anonymous No.4881312]

Do classic jrpgs still have a place in today's world or do they all use outdated concepts? Will they ever come back?

[Anonymous No.4881332]

>>4881312
Define what you think is classic, first.

[Anonymous No.4881335]

There are still new Dragon Quest games being made, and they're pretty much the same classic style JRPGs as ever. There's always new releases of old RPGs being released as well - I bought Romancing SaGa 2 on PS4 but I haven't got around to playing it yet. I heard it's a mobile port.

I can't play a lot of new-style JRPGs - I don't like the moe waifubait stuff, and it seems like the style of the stories being told has changed. I can't really explain how, but it doesn't feel as epic as before. New western story-based games don't really hold my attention either.

[Anonymous No.4881338]

A lot of recent turn based rpgs have taken big steps backwards and try to emulate the more primitive NES jrpgs. I think the best ones came later on as developers experimented more, stuff like ChronobTrigger’s positional combat, Mario RPG’s timed hits, or FF’s ATB system were all cool innovations that set them apart from the rest of the genre and provided something new and interesting for the player to work with.

I think just about any new jrpg will have to provide some kind of new, interesting take on the core aspects of the genre like the above games did to reach any success. I didn’t play Bravely Default but from what I’ve heard the system it uses is somewhat unique with being able to stall attacks or something like that. Considering that’s the only moderately successful turnbased jrpg in recent memory, I think what I’m saying holds true.

I doubt they’ll ever come back in a big way, but if there are devs who can innovate on previous systems in ways that are meaningful then we should get the occasional good game. That’s an unfortunately big IF though.

[Anonymous No.4881343]

>>4881338
Obsidian piggybacked off Mario RPG with South Park Stick of Truth, but the game's strong point was mostly the story and characters, not the battle system which got really easy.

[Anonymous No.4881351]

>>4881343
Even though it was easy, that battle system was fun as hell

[Anonymous No.4881354]

>>4881351
It's fun, but I have a feeling the Paper Mario battle system isn't a good template for a more challenging or complicated combat system. The timed hits part isnt a bad idea, as other rpgs did something similar. I dunno. Like, could I see a FF game using the Paper Mario system?

[Anonymous No.4881371]

>>4881354
If I'm looking for a complicated battle system, I usually go for tactical RPGs. I'd love to see more of those.

[Anonymous No.4881374]

>>4881354
As much as I love PM I can't deny that the battle system is watered down compared to say, FF. That said, I've always wanted a South Park game that mimicked the Earthbound/Mother battle system

[Anonymous No.4881378]

>>4881371
TRPGS my problem with those is the slow ass pace caused by fights compared to town exploring and other story things.

[Anonymous No.4881385]

>>4881312
let's change the subject of the thread. what is generally and specifically appealing about different jrpg game mechanics?

this is a broad subject, so I first suggest talking about battle systems since that's what defines most console jrpgs. what works? what doesn't? what's tired? what's a guilty pleasure? what did you want to see that you never did? examples please!

[Anonymous No.4881485]

>>4881385
>what works?
Being able to delay/cancel enemy attacks like e.g. Grandia did. Also its positional play, though I feel that can get out of hand if you offer the player too many options.
>what doesn't?
That shit Lufia I did where you could only attack enemy "groups", i.e. none of the three slimes you're facing individually but randomly one out of them, or randomly one out of the two newts in the same battle.
Luckily I can't say it was common or name another game that did this, but let's not bring it back either way.
>what's tired?
"buff, spam your strongest attacks and heal if necessary" for bosses, though it is hard to get away from that. If you rely on certain gimmicks, it can be frustrating for the player if they don't figure out the gimmick, and there are only so many things you can do here. Is "cast poison on this guy and wait for seven turns to instakill him (and maybe use silence to prevent him from removing the poison), or beat down a ridiculously high number of hp" something that's been done? Even if not, it's hard to come up with more unique ways to battle bosses.

[Anonymous No.4881497]

>>4881312
I like jrpgs now way more than when i was a kid, but i was a dumb child so... take my anecdotal opinion with a grain of sand

[Anonymous No.4881505]

>>4881354
Action Commands are basically just quicktime events that you initiate. I think the basic premise has tons of untapped potential.

If less of them were binary success/fail operations and worked on a scale, I think that would leave more room for improvement, though it does mean skilled players will have an even easier time. Now that I think about it, Undertale kind of did this. The shmup genre hybrid system was definitely a bigger part of it though, but now that makes me wonder what can and can’t be considered an action command type system.

Puzzles and ‘figuring out’ each battle was also a big thing, which has more to do with classic rpgs than I realized, but that’s only meaningful on a first playthrough.

I think PM’s badge system is definitely worth acknowledging too, only vaguely similar thing I know of is FF7’s materia system.

>>4881385
That’s going to be a case by case issue with each game that has anything unique. Is there anything appealing about the bog standard NES FF/DQ style of combat? The first DQ has some gambling elements to the basic system, but I’ve always been too bored by the others to get into them. I don’t get the appeal.

I know about fun twists on the ‘select from menu’ template that underlies the genre, but the only way I can think of for that basic system to be fun is with puzzle or gambling elements.

[Anonymous No.4881507]

>>4881505
First I heard of the badge system being similar to materia. The BP I suppose is you increasing your materia slots at that point.

[Anonymous No.4881712]

>>4881312
Of course they do. Just look at the Bravely Default games, which are basically Final Fantasy III on a modern system.

[Anonymous No.4881765]

Warning, autism ahead.
One thing I think people miss about the early JRPG style is how much of it was devoted to the core gameplay, and how much the core gameplay revolved around the idea of exploring dangerous areas. The SNES Final Fantasy games really do not require a lot of time spent in exploring towns or in events and cutscenes-- especially early in the game. Towns are places to rest, shop, and pick up clues.

I just started playing FF5 and taking notes about how long it takes to do things. After 3 hours of playing I've spent less than 20 minutes in towns, and most of that involved two scripted events. The rest of the time has been either in the field or in dungeons. I did not stop to grind at any point, but have not been trying to speed through the content otherwise.

Another thing is that after 3 hours, I gained access to a flying dragon that lets me return to any area (town or dungeon) I'd already visited in less than a minute. It seems like a minor thing but opening up previous areas like this helps keep a linear game from feeling to confined and restricted. I'd be interested to see the average number of hours a player has to spend in any PS1-era Final Fantasy game before they gain access to a mode of transport that lets you backtrack so easily.

[Anonymous No.4881767]

>>4881385
The fundamental purpose of a classic JRPG is to stimulate the imagination of the player and make them feel like they're exploring a fantasty world and taking part in an epic story. All of the mechanics of the early JRPGs can be explained in those terms.

[Anonymous No.4881787]

>>4881385
>what is specifically appealing
Character customization!! I want to mess with stats and make unique builds!

[Anonymous No.4881794]

>>4881312
If anything some were too ahead of their time

[Anonymous No.4881909]

>>4881371
>Tactical RPGs

Meh, the only additional complexity is the tactical movement. General strategy for attacking enemies is the same as in JRPGs. You concentrate your forces on one enemy.

[Anonymous No.4882075]

If by "classic" you mean cinematic FF7 garbage where encounters last forever because of indulgent, unnecessary animations - then I really hope they're dead.

If you mean the DQ style gameplay, then it's just as fun as ever.

[Anonymous No.4882136]

>>4881312
Firstly, they're still coming out by big studios (see: main DQ entries)

Secondly, it's the dominant genre in this board. The niche is very big.

[Anonymous No.4882454]

>making rpg maker game
>make gimmicky battle system that requires player involvement and thinking
>grinding doesn't turn battles into a joke
>but even the easier battles last at least 2 minutes

Can you make a classical rpg with turn based battles that require skill, AND are over fast?
Games that manage to do that will always have a place imo, at least on handhelds

[Anonymous No.4882470]

>>4881312
Yeah definitely but you can't really use some of the old antiquated aspects of the older ones. Personally I really like how newer dragon quests have enemies on the overworld, so little improvements like that and other quality of life improvements to the genre can give it merit even today

[Anonymous No.4882490]

>>4881312
octopath traveller, smt v and pokemon gen 8 are the most anticipated switch games besides smush.

[Anonymous No.4882498]

>>4882490

Pokemon Gen 8 is almost guaranteed to be a massive disappointment but I'll grant you the other two.

[Anonymous No.4882509]

>>4882498
yeah gen 6 and 7 were awful but you know they will sell like hotcakes.

[Anonymous No.4882547]

>>4881909
>Meh, the only additional complexity is the tactical movement.
That adds an enormous amount of potential depth to combat, though. There are so many more decisions to make and scenarios to encounter.
>You concentrate your forces on one enemy.
What if the enemy is out of reach? What if your units are scattered and can't concentrate on one enemy? What if a better strategy is actually to not attack ANY enemies right away, and instead spend a round or two buffing yourselves up while the enemy advances? In a 3D scenario, you have even more depth such as having different modes of vertical transport like flying, teleportation, or jumping. If 2 units are in combat against a wall, but only one unit can jump high enough to get on that wall, that's a huge advantage a smart player can exploit.

Adding the dimension of a playing field makes all those scenarios possible.

[Anonymous No.4882586]

>>4881485
>That shit Lufia I did where you could only attack enemy "groups", i.e. none of the three slimes you're facing individually but randomly one out of them, or randomly one out of the two newts in the same battle.
>Luckily I can't say it was common or name another game that did this, but let's not bring it back either way.

Wizardry games did that, and for a good reason, considering the transition to more graphics oriented systems. With the groups system you could have more than ten enemies in one battle without losing the ability to display their graphics (or having ant-sized enemy sprites). And having a shit ton of enemies to fight is fun, especially when you compare to the standard jrpg fare which pits you against groups of a maximum of 4~6 enemies per battle.
Besides that, while specific, single enemy, targeting is gone, you open up some new mechanics and tactics.

[Anonymous No.4882618]

>>4882586
Could a non trpg handle large enemy variety groups with ability to target individually? It would certainly change the pacing of fights to be more serious.

[Anonymous No.4882641]

Some of the modern SMT games are pretty solid traditional menu-driven JRPGs. Looking forward to DQXI hitting in English later...

[Anonymous No.4882656]

>>4882586
>you open up some new mechanics and tactics
For example?
All it did in Lufia I was introduce a roulette where you either hit the enemy that's about to die so you only take two hits on the enemy turn and live, or hit the guy at full health and take three hits instead of two so you die.

[Anonymous No.4882662]

>>4882641
Too bad smt is a full on school drama fest with dating games. Im aware of smt4 but somethings off about it.

[Anonymous No.4882706]

>>4881485
>Being able to delay/cancel enemy attacks
The only game I've played with this is FFX, but I felt that turn based combat with a visible queue was a lot of fun, and being able to see how actions changed the queue opened the possibility for fights to be highly strategic, especially for minimalist runs.

>it's hard to come up with more unique ways to battle bosses.
I think this is because the battle systems of many games don't allow for creative play. For instance, elemental systems at face value are a cool idea, but when you are given tiered elemental spells whose only difference is their color and amount of damage they do, game play is limited. There needs to be tradeoffs for using magic beyond "uses MP" to make choices interesting, which could allow fights to be more interesting. You point out that gimmicks suck because they are a lot of trial and error, and once you know the trick the challenge seems to evaporate, but it can be effective as shown by say (non-jrpg roguelike) nethack. For games with unlimited times between moves, the only real skill is wisdom.

>positional play, though I feel that can get out of hand if you offer the player too many options.
This is a holy grail that I'm not sure anyone has actually nailed yet in a jrpg. It opens the door to a lot of possibilities, but also takes much more careful level and enemy design than the stock menu-based jrpg. Action-adventure rpgs like SoM, SD3, and Terranigma each are fun, but they seem to fall short of the potential here.

>>4881505
>I don’t get the appeal
somebody else quote the DQ creator as saying something along the lines that it impossible to make a single game that pleases everybody. some people like having to put in a lot of thought into their games, others like to, for instance, grind.

>>4881787
>Character customization!!
The contention seems to be between having things like classes which distinguishes roles, and over-customization which leaves characters the same.

[Anonymous No.4882725]

I was listening to Design Doc talk about sports rpgs like blood bowl and mario golf ganeboy version that marry the two together.

[Anonymous No.4882773]

>>4882706
>The contention seems to be between having things like classes which distinguishes roles, and over-customization which leaves characters the same.
A less commonly identified problem is that content must be designed for a full range of customized parties.

Consider the "Magus Sisters" battle in FF4. If you had Rydia at that point, that battle would be a joke. But you don't. You have 3 melee characters and old man Tellah who has a max of 90 MP and no spells that can ignore the fat one's wall. It's not an extremely hard fight or anything, but you are forced to make decisions about which sister to focus attacks on and what to do with Tellah (who can't directly attack the target you'd really prefer him to attack).

After you get Rydia, the only battle with a design that resembles this is the CPU, which punishes you seriously for killing both the attacker and defender. (The best spell Rydia can use during that battle is the Sylph summon, which you'll only have at that point if you've made progress on the Yang sidequest)

[Anonymous No.4882791]

>>4882706
>once you know the trick the challenge seems to evaporate
That is very true. Then again, I guess I'd prefer having bosses with gimmicks where you know the optimal strategy after your first playthrough over bosses without gimmicks where you know the strategy on the first run, namely "buff, spam strongest attack, heal if necessary."
>careful level and enemy design
That is certainly one thing that is very important for action RPGs. It has to matter whether you are fighting this enemy or that one, them having different sprites and different stats alone does not cut it. Also, magic seems to be a struggle to integrate well, though I feel Soul Blazer did a pretty good job.
As far as customization goes, that one's almost a must have if the game is menu-based because then the only skill is decision-making. Being able to take different approaches also adds replayability, of course.
Not every party member should be able to fill out every role the same way. So even if two characters can be white mages or whatever, maybe let them have character specific skills?
That would mean you wouldn't be shoehorned into an exact party composition too much, even if in the end one character-based skill is probably better than all the others. (Balancing is always and issue and there will be cookie-cutter builds).

[Anonymous No.4882794]

>>4881354
Closest I can think of would be the ring system from Lost Odyssey. Instead of timing a button press, you had to let go of the trigger at the right time. Every other game I've seen implement it is a bit simpler, like south park or costume quest.

[Anonymous No.4882835]

>>4881385
>what works? what doesn't?
Those are both pointless questions because there's a lot of ways to structure a game, there's hardly any wrong way to create a RPG's structure or mechanics, but there are MANY wrong ways in which you could implement any of those things.
It mostly boils down to personal tastes and opinions but there's no objectively right answer, see how divided the FF fanbase is about their own games, especially when it comes to linearity, FFX is a lot more appreciated than FFXIII despite both sharing the same corridor like structure in terms of progression(and really most other games in the series, albeit to various degrees).
Same reason why the eternal feud between Morrowind and Gothic fans is a thing when it comes to WRPGs and open worlds.

What most JRPGs(and WRPGs) lack is proper mechanical balance and polish.
Sure, there's also stark differences in mechanical depth between different franchises but if some people still prefer the usual story focused linear games with no player inputs, same old character archetypes and oldass 3-tier lists of spells with tons of "elements" and buffs/debuffs who am I to complain?
Luckily I can get the deeper and more elaborated systems I want elsewhere and until I can keep getting those everything's fine, to each their own, the important thing is that there has to be some choice for everyone.
>>4881794
SaGa's not a good example, they're all invariably ahead of their time but they're that one exception that confirms the rule, not to mention that it often works against them because most people can't deal with weird design choices and the series thrives on that and constantly reinventing itself.
And that is mostly because the franchise is spearheaded by a madman with no regards for any rule of design, aided by a bunch of capable and no less ambitious nerds with a boner for reinventing videogame RPGs and exploring new possibilities, the vast majority of developers aren't like tthat.

[Anonymous No.4882849]

>>4882706
my idea for strategic movement in turn based combat play would probably tie into your other idea of changing around gimmicks of certain spells - for example (off the cuff and not very fleshed out) when positional play is introduced, upgrade one of the weaker exsiting spells or skills in a character's arsenal such that it "distracts" the enemy or however you'd like to put it - during the animation of the attack, you can do a timed button press that opens up a menu for party movement. this adds strategy to not just using nuke spells, especially in poss battles, since using a weaker spell and repositioning could allow for different combat tactics. could this work?

[Anonymous No.4882851]

>>4882773
>first playing this game
>decide to attack annoying spellcasting sister first
>fat sister revives her
>die to virus
FUCK the magus sisters

[Anonymous No.4882861]

>>4881312
No. Even though turn-based doesn't bother me it just pisses off a lot of current-console gamers.

[Anonymous No.4882891]

>>4882835
>FFX is a lot more appreciated than FFXIII despite both sharing the same corridor like structure in terms of progression(and really most other games in the series, albeit to various degrees).
Neither of those are retro so I can't comment specifically, but "various degrees" can make a big difference in the overall feel of the game. Earlier I pointed out that after 3 hours playing FF5, you gain access to a "vehicle" that lets you fly to any previously visited area in seconds. There's a similar feature in FF4. You get a hovercraft very early on, and then after about 5 hours you get the airship, which enables the same thing. You sometimes lose access to areas temporarily but they usually open back up again in short order.

Those games are very linear in the sense that there's only ever really one "next dungeon/event" with only occasional you may have side quests. But gaining those transportation mechanisms that let you trivially backtrack and look around the world for new possibilities was an important feature for me that I really found lacking in the PS1-era games. In FF9, I think the first point you really get access to wander the world and easily revisit prior areas is when you get the Blue Narciss ship, which for me was well over 20 hours into the game.

[Anonymous No.4882894]

>>4882851
Yeah I think what you're meant to do is have Tellah take out the short one, then suck MP from the tall one, while the melee chars attack the fat one.

[Anonymous No.4882965]

>>4881385
>take a wrpg/tabletop gameplay
>streamline it and give it 1000% qol features
This was always the strength of "jrpg" or better referred to as light RPG.
examples:
Haggling is a cool feature in wrpgs(elder scrolls) but it gets old. So they make it in jrpgs an innate skill and set the price to a certain amount depending on skill points invested(Star Ocean), quick and easy every time.

Adventuring is fun and hunger systems make it more immersive, but it's tedious and time consuming as well as takes focus away from main quest. So in JRPGs there are auto cook done after every combat encounters(tales), and even tack on some optional character interaction sequences(grandia).

[Anonymous No.4883482]

>>4882662
Not all are like that, my good man. Stick to the main SMT games and not Persona, since those don't sound like your cup of tea.

[Anonymous No.4883515]

>>4882490
>octopath traveller
You mean the shitty nostalgiafag cash grab.

[Anonymous No.4883569]

>>4883515
yeah I dont know how anyone can like that shitty looking game

[Anonymous No.4883597]

>>4883515
Nostalgiafag cashgrab it might very well be, and it does look absolutely horrid, but people have indeed got an eye on it, the demo downloads alone have been more than a million already.

[Anonymous No.4883619]

>>4881312
They're outdated as fuck, at leas the turn based filled combat, grinding padding, anime trope bullshit that makes up 99% of the genre.

[Anonymous No.4883840]

>>4883597
All that shows is that the shilling brainwash worked on the masses. There's no competitors, so it's not like any dev has to try to sell their game these days if they have the money to advertise on the top gaming sites.

[Anonymous No.4884242]

>>4882835
>FFX is a lot more appreciated than FFXIII despite both sharing the same corridor like structure in terms of progression
Most FF games just tend to shunt you to the next plot event rather than being open but XIII must be the straw that broke the camel back because it felt like it went even further such that the character customization options and battle strategy were also completely "decided" for the players.

Even X with the original Sphere Grid never reached the level that XIII did - there were a bunch of ways you could handle creatures that were tough against physical attacks even without Lulu, for example, even if it's simply just running away and not fighting those mobs (Lulu's a character that's considered fairly weak due to her extremely low Speed)

[Anonymous No.4884251]

>>4881312
Considering every second fucking thread is about JRPG on this board, yes they do fine.

[Anonymous No.4884303]

>>4881312
Project Octopath is going to prove how they still work today.

[Anonymous No.4884319]

>>4884303
They could always fuck up and pull a "Bravely Default later chapters" again

[Anonymous No.4884521]

>>4883840
I wouldn't call it brainwashing, the game's simply pushing a lot of buttons for the casual audience.
It has 2D sprites but in a 3D environment deliberately designed in a similar way to old 2D games, because they know how casuals call full 2D cheap.
It has the most plain combat ever but with a few "modern" gimmicks like weapon weakness, which wasn't that common back in the days too, and a resource/momentum based gimmick similar to Bravely Default.
It uses a multiple main character structure as a novelty because they know people aren't used to it and their main other series that does it is extremely unpopular and almost unknown in the west when it comes to casual, so they can sell it as a novelty of sorts.
It's another example of clever and aggressive marketing, though I wish they used it on products that deserve it instead of this stuff.
>>4884242
>it felt like it went even further such that the character customization options and battle strategy were also completely "decided" for the players.
Role switching is a thing so it's not really accurate.
Sure, it might have felt like that on a surface level, but the truth is that FFXIII still keeps more or less the same level of customization, but done slightly differently, not to mention that it was the only game in the series that tried to do something else with its magic system as to give you a reason to use spell tiers besides damage, which is honestly noteworthy given how very little all the other titles cared.
Besides, FFIV got a resurgence in the late years and it's factually more limited in both customization and strategy than XIII, while also sharing a very similar corridor progression, yet it's praised a lot more than XIII, and this is without pulling out the usual problems with it like copying FFII's character archetypes almost completely and doing the somehow worse, fake death galore and whatever else.

As I said, in the end it is -mostly- a matter of tastes.

[Anonymous No.4884530]

>>4881312
Imo yes, but practically speaking JRPGs are dead purely because the general public doesn't want them anymore. The Japanese used to love them, but now they only want simple smartphone games that consume your day in short bursts of time rather than lengthy, plot-driven, turn-based adventures.

Just look at Pokémon. It started off as a fairly standard JRPG with a monster catching gimmick. Now the RPG aspect takes a back seat to the things people are supposedly interested in such as customizing your character, taking photos, etc. The combat mechanics of gen I are even considered too 'difficult' for today's children, so the game spews endless tutorials at you. The latest game even removes random encounters and battling wild Pokémon as well as giving you a ton of free items before the first gym battle, as well as not allowing you to even fight him without a Pokémon with a type that's super effective against Rock (even though Pikachu now learns a Fighting move).

Look at Final Fantasy. Once a beloved franchise that produced quality games....Now they make interactive movies. Last one I played was XIII, which was literally just a straight corridor with cutscenes, no resource management and no risk since dying just sends you back to the start of the battle (even if it's just against some mook). At least they went back to basics somewhat with Bravely Default.

Look at the Tales series. Charming, relatively simple action RPGs are now clusterfucks of confusing combat mechanics and endless combos, making them resemble fighting games more than RPGs.

There's only one company that consistently produces 'standard' RPGs and that company is Atlus. They also manage to show that 'turn-based' does not mean 'devoid of challenge'.

Still, whenever some indie company makes another bog-standard JRPG with an uninteresting battle system, boring plot and no challenge and it flops everyone else just assumes 'oh JRPGs are inherently easy and boring, let's not make any anymore'.

[Anonymous No.4884569]

>>4884530
What a load of bollocks
>The Japanese used to love them, but now they only want simple smartphone games that consume your day in short bursts of time
Except that there's plenty of proper JRPGs ported to phones and tablets nowadays and handhelds are still a thing.
>Now the RPG aspect takes a back seat to the things people are supposedly interested in such as customizing your character, taking photos
Modern Pokemon is leagues ahead of gen1 in terms of mechanics.
>Once a beloved franchise that produced quality games....Now they make interactive movies.
FF always were interactive movies, the fatigue is real, it has nothing to do wih the supposed quality of the series and FFXV is still one of the best sellers in the franchise.
>are now clusterfucks of confusing combat mechanics and endless combos, making them resemble fighting games more than RPGs
That has always been the intent and it's a good thing the series evolved, or have you forgot that you could use fighting games input since the PS days?
>that company is Atlus
Dungeon Crawlers aren't standard RPGs.
>They also manage to show that 'turn-based' does not mean 'devoid of challenge'.
Nobody but a bunch of ironic weeaboos in the west think that, unless you think that tier 3 buffs/debuffs, healing and weakness spamming is somehow chessmaster tier depth, I wonder why you also say Pokemon has been casualized but forget to mention things like Luster Candy or Demon Sources when it comes to modern SMT.

[Anonymous No.4884573]

>>4884530
>JRPGs are dead purely because the general public doesn't want them anymore.
There are still massive mainstream releases right now you delusional faggot. What's the latest DQ to you?

[Anonymous No.4884587]

>>4884569
Yeah, modern Pokémon's mechanics are better. Did you see the trailers for the new Let's Go Eevee/Pikachu games, though? Those are going to use the catching system from Pokémon Go, will simplify the battles, etc.

Selling well doesn't mean making good games. Transformers movies sold well but they were not good movies. FFXIII sold well but it wasn't a good game. Admittedly I haven't played FFXV so I admit that I don't know if the game's actually good. Also, the difference in 'interactive movie-ness' between FFXIII and, say, FFVI is enormous. Story was always important in FF games, but they weren't always literally straight corridors with cutscenes in between.

I don't even mean the fighting game combos, I mean literally the complexity of the game's mechanics.

Atlus doesn't make only dungeon crawlers though. Etrian Odyssey games are dungeon crawlers, sure. SMT? Definitely not in the sense that they used to be anymore, they're closer to standard JRPGs now. Persona? Same.

Also, although SMT is by no means the most challenging game in the world you're delusional if you think it's not challenging. Maybe if you're very familiar with the series and know which skills are generally good and which aren't, sure. I'll concede that Pokémon's mechanics are more complex, but Pokémon's complexity is only relevant if you're playing against human players because you can beat any Pokémon game with a team of six Rattata. You seem to be under the mistaken assumption that 'challenge' implies 'complexity' but that's not the case.

>>4884573
The first mainline DQ game that wasn't a remake in five years? Don't cherrypick, you know as well as I do that JRPGs, particularly turn-based ones are not nearly as popular as they used to be.

[Anonymous No.4884593]

>>4884569
>FF always were interactive movies.
They really weren't. Not by any non-retarded definition of the word movie.

Sure, even the early games portrayed dramatic scenes with sprite acting, but the ratio of cutscenes and interactive events to gameplay was very low. FF before FF7 (and to a small degree FF6) had the following traits:

> Brief cutscenes.
> Only a couple of hours of cutscenes all told.
> Small, simple towns that take just a few minutes to explore.
> Quick, simple events that often feature core gameplay like the Battle on the Big Bridge in FF5.
> Quickly paced battles with short, punchy animations.
> Lots of freedom to explore the world despite the linear progression.

After FF7, you had:
> Long, dialog-heavy cutscenes
> 10+ hours of cutscenes.
> Large, elaborate towns with minigames and other distractions
> Elaborate events like "I Want To Be Your Canary" from FF9.
> Slow-paced battles with long animations
> Heavily restricted exploration until late in the game
This last one is mostly for the sake of telling a complex narrative with multiple actors in different parts of the world-- where any real freedom to move would screw up the story.

[Anonymous No.4884597]

>>4884569
No old FF fan bought XV.

[Anonymous No.4884602]

>>4884587
>Did you see the trailers for the new Let's Go Eevee/Pikachu games, though
What has an admittedly middleware game made to fill some space do with anything? Showing that Gamefreak is an utterly incompetent studio? I knew that already, Pokemon always showed that, it's still not a proper mainline release and I hope you won't pretend otherwise.
>Selling well doesn't mean making good games
That is true for the earlier FF games too though, besides, there's plenty of people who like modern FF so saying they're bad games because you don't like them means nothing.
>Story was always important in FF games, but they weren't always literally straight corridors with cutscenes in between.
FFIV was like that though, FFX was also a corridor exactly like FFXIII was, you didn't even have a proper world map.
>I mean literally the complexity of the game's mechanics.
And that's supposed to be a bad thing? Besides, as somebody who played nearly all games in the series including most spinoffs, that depth only comes into play if you want to challenge yourself, there's no need for you to give a damn about what's better to break Iron Stance and what isn't, CC mechanics are also super straightforward so unless you're playing some characters that are made for expert players looking for a challenge like Galad, Sophie or Patty you don't need to give a damn about 90% of the games' mechanics.
>you're delusional if you think it's not challenging
It isn't, EO is more challenging AND complex that SMT, SMT is a barely above FF tier franchise, it even uses the very same magic design, even most other games published by Atlus are more challenging than SMT, the Growlanser games for instance.
>>4884593
>but the ratio of cutscenes and interactive events to gameplay was very low.
Maybe for the NES games, FFIV already was plenty cinematic, the only thing that changed was the scale and size of it all, not the nature of the games.
>>4884597
Keep telling yourself that if it makes you sleep at night.

[Anonymous No.4884604]

>>4884602
No ff fan bought XV.

[Anonymous No.4884610]

>>4884604
Anon...

[Anonymous No.4884614]

>>4884602
And FFX is also not retro. It came out for the PS2, after a full generation of highly cinematic FF games which sold very well. It's a terrible example if your argument is "well Final Fantasy has always been interactive movies" because they haven't been. Exploration used to be a bigger part of the gameplay.

Yes, EO is more challenging than SMT. I like EO more than I like SMT. I didn't talk about EO because EO is not a JRPG and we were talking about JRPGs and not dungeon crawlers. Both series are made by Atlus, though, and both series are challenging. Saying that SMT is easy because EO is hard is kind of like saying that Banjo Kazooie is bad because Mario 64 is better.

[Anonymous No.4884623]

>>4884602
Being "plenty cinematic" does not make a game an "interactive movie."

>the only thing that changed was the scale and size of it all, not the nature of the games
Size and scale makes all the difference in the world for a game like this. When you add up all the time you spend reading dialog and watching battle animations versus actually making gameplay decisions, it starts becoming somewhat reasonable to suggest the game might be called an "interactive movie." I think it's still a lazy/shitposting term to apply to FF7 but it's not entirely unreasonable. Applying it to FF4 is just ridiculous and ignores virtually everything about how the game actually plays.

[Anonymous No.4884625]

>>4884602
>FFIV was like that[linear corridor] though
No, it's not. You have linear segments followed by segments where you're free to wander increasingly large fractions of the world you've covered up to that point. The plot progression is linear but the game doesn't feel like a corridor because the world is continually opening up and allowing you the freedom to move about in it.

[Anonymous No.4884636]

>>4884604
I'm in my 30's, have been a fan since FFVI's American SNES release, and I loved FFXV. It revitalized the franchise after ten years of XIIIshit and XIVshit. Best game since XII. I'm being entirely serious.

[Anonymous No.4884640]

>>4884614
>It's a terrible example
So you are ignoring how I used FFIV as another example?
How about FFVI too?
>Exploration used to be a bigger part of the gameplay.
What exploration?
The only titles that had meaningful exploration that isn't a last minute diversion with a handful of optional dungeons are FF, FF2 and FF5, the rest is just an afterthought where your airship of whatever else is given to you to reach the next bottlenecked plot point.
Exploration isn't just giving you one or two optional dungeons during your main quest(which also makes up for 90% of your game's content), exploration is giving you meaningful ways to progress through the game in your own way, which FF barely ever had, with the first two games being the only decent example of that, even DQ had it beat when it came to that.
>because EO is not a JRPG
It sure isn't a WRPG, so I don't get what you mean by that.
>both series are challenging
Not really, not at all, a few EO maybe but SMT is not even remotely challenging, especially not the retro entries.
Besides, that's not the point of this thread.
>>4884623
>Being "plenty cinematic" does not make a game an "interactive movie."
Same is true for FFXIII then.
>>4884625
>No, it's not
It totally fucking is.
>You have linear segments followed by segments where you're free to wander
Free to wander WHERE?
The world is absolutely empty, you're free to "wander" to whatever plains of absolute nothing until the next plot point or backtrack to cities or dungeons you've already visited which also have NOTHING at all in it since their checkpoint function has already been fulfilled.
I swear this kind of willful ignorance about basic facts is infuriating.

You all bitch and moan about FFXIII being somehow a moviegame and a corridor simulator but will defend FFIV for being the same exact thing because there's some overworld map tiles you can stroll around in?
Do you realize just how ridiculous you sound?
Have you ever played games with actual exploration even?

[Anonymous No.4884641]

>>4884636
You're not a fan. Now take that non retro shit back to /v/

[Anonymous No.4884643]

>>4884641
>y-you're not a fan if you like the games I don't like!

[Anonymous No.4884668]

>>4884640
>The world is absolutely empty, you're free to "wander" to whatever plains of absolute nothing until the next plot point or backtrack to cities or dungeons you've already visited which also have NOTHING at all in it since their checkpoint function has already been fulfilled.
It's not nothing. It makes a huge difference in how the game feels to play, unless you're a single-minded player whose sole goal is to complete the game as fast as possible to see the story.

The most braindead-obvious thing you can do via backtracking is fight the monsters in those so-called "empty fields." It may seem pointless to you but I assure you that when I played the game as a 10-year old, it was definitely something I enjoyed doing.

Also, it's false to say there's nothing to do in previous areas. First, you might be able to purchase items and equipment you couldn't afford the first time through. Second, there might be secrets you missed or NPCs that say something interesting you didn't notice before. In some cases, there are changes to the NPCs in the town.

About 5 hours into FF4, when you get the Airship, you can:

> Visit Toroia town
> Visit Toroia castle to move the plot forward
> Revisit Mist Village and pick up the Tiara, Change rod, and Dancing Knife
> Visit the Silvera island that you never have any reason to visit otherwise except for the Excalibur side quest later on. There are weapons for sale here.
> Plunder Eblan Castle where there are chests with higher-level enemies that will probably wreck you if you don't know what you're doing. But you'll be rewarded with several good items including a sword for Cecil.
> Visit Aghart which has little of interest now but will be relevant later. (Aghart does have cheap iron armor for Cid if you can't afford the armor in Silvera.)
> Revisit Mysidia if you need to buy caster armor (which you may need in the upcoming dungeon)

[Anonymous No.4884680]

>>4884668
Once you return to the surface after going to the underworld (which is linear the first time through), in addition to revisiting all the other old overworld areas, you can:

> Talk to Yang's Wife in Fabul to start the spoon quest
> Fight Odin in Baron Castle
> Clear out Eblan and explore Mist Village if you haven't done that yet (the items in Mist village are still worth picking up)

Once you go back to the the underworld, you get an airship that can visit:

> Dwarf Castle
> Tomra
> Kokkol's House
> Sealed Cave
> Sylph Cave (optional dungeon)
> Land of Monsters (optional dungeon)

After completing the Sealed Cave and drill back to the surface, you have access to everything in the game (plus the Moon once you obtain the Lunar Whale). With the Lunar Whale, you also have access to:

> Moon's surface and a couple of caves with new monsters
> Bahamut's Cave (optional dungeon)
> Humingway's house
> Lunarian's chamber

Once you trigger the FuSoYa event, you're locked into the Bab-Il sequence, which is probably the longest cutscene up to this point. Fitting for the penultimate dungeon. Reasonable to say that if a player has made it this far, they're OK to sit through some dramatic scenes with all the character's from earlier in the game.

After beating Bab-Il you unlock the final dungeon and can access everywhere else.

[Anonymous No.4884701]

>>4884668
>>4884680
>A bunch of sidequests unlocked at main quest nodes in FFIV makes a huge difference in a bunch of sidequests unlocked at main quest nodes in FFXIII
>Especially when FFXIII has much more than FFIV
I give up, there's no discussion to be had here, if you want to pretend FFIV does it better than FFXIII it's no business of mine, but I won't deal with such incredible hypocrisy and shortsightedness.

[Anonymous No.4884706]

>>4884680
And to put all this in context, you can complete FF4 in 20-24 hours playing at a reasonable pace with a few hours allocated for exploring and grinding. (personally I can complete FF4 comfortably in about 17 hours). If you spend more time than that on this game it's because you spent a lot of time grinding or left the game on overnight or something.

This is about equal to the time it took me to reach the point in FF9 where I first obtain a ship and am able to visit previous locations. This took about 25 hours and happens on Disc 3 in the original PS game. This is because FF9 tells an elaborate, detailed story with lots of subtlety, side characters, and events happening at certain places at certain times.

So, the first two discs of FF9 are very much like a "corridor" when compared to the entire experience of playing FF4, which takes the same amount of time. From Disc 3 onward, FF9 does open up and begins to play more like the classic FF games. But it took 25 hours to reach this point. That's a huge difference in gameplay experience.

[Anonymous No.4884709]

You guys are attacking each other over why the other is wrong for having fun and liking different things. That's not the point, and results in a shit thread.

[Anonymous No.4884710]

>>4884701
I haven't played FFXIII. Feel free to attempt to explain the nature of its non-linearity in the same way I described FFIV. All I know is that the shit you are saying about FFIV is beyond ignorant.

What I do know is that people calling FFXIII a corridor are likely to compare it to FF9, FF10, and FF12, NOT pre-FF7 games.

[Anonymous No.4884712]

To clarify, the point is not to compare what games do things "better" whatever that means, just what do you find fun or tedious regarding mechanics.

[Anonymous No.4884714]

>>4884709
>You guys are attacking each other over why the other is wrong for having fun and liking different things. That's not the point, and results in a shit thread.
Dear Retard,
I don't care what anyone likes. I object to use of the term "interactive movie" to describe FF4 because it is objectively wrong.

[Anonymous No.4884721]

>>4884710
>Feel free to attempt to explain the nature of its non-linearity
I don't have to attempt to explain the nature of something that doesn't exist in the first place, FFIV is not non-linear, a handful of side quests unlocked during a linear, bottlenecked main quest IS NOT nonlinearity, same exact thing for XIII.
Also this>>4884709, I don't have time to waste on what is clearly a misguided dickwaving contest of opinions on what game does the same exact thing better than another game in the same franchise, especially when it's about FF and its horrible fanbase.
You want to pretend FFIV isn't as super focused on cinematic narrative as FFVII or FFXIII, fine by me, but the discussion ends here for any sane person who's not blinded by nostalgia.

[Anonymous No.4884726]

>>4884721
>You want to pretend FFIV isn't as super focused on cinematic narrative as FFVII
good god what an idiot. You want to pretend it's not?

[Anonymous No.4884793]

>>4881312
Bravely Default was very well received, and Alliance Alive got good reviews, both of which are on the 3DS. There is a market for them, but nobody to make them.

[Anonymous No.4884810]

>>4884721
It's really this kind of cancerous discussion that is ruining /vr/. It's not even 'discussion' because you don't even admit where you're wrong even though multiple people have pointed it out.

FFXIII is literally, LITERALLY a series of straight fucking corridors with cutscenes in between. No-one is saying games like FFIV are not linear (most JRPGs are) but they sure as hell aren't fucking straight corridors either.

And, honestly, it's one of many examples of map simplification in modern gaming. You can compare Victory Road maps in Pokémon games. You can compare early Tales games' (like Phantasia) overworld to the weird, usually straight, boring and empty routes that connect cities in games like Xillia and Graces. Even Vesperia, which does have an overworld is so littered with constant cutscenes that it hardly feels like you're playing a game. No one is saying these games used to be open world and not story-driven but there's clearly a loss of map complexity and player interaction. Player interaction in this case meaning 'time spent not clicking through text boxes'.

[Anonymous No.4884821]

>>4884810
Excessive complexity just frustrates people and pads the game length for no reason beyond "Fuck you". Look at Phantasy Star 2; molasses walking speed, molasses battle animations (battles are seldom difficult), and dungeons are atrociously long and mazeous without having any depth whatsoever. If it was ported to the PS4 engine the game length would be cut to a fifth.

[Anonymous No.4884848]

>>4884821
Excessive simplicity is also frustrating. Why does a game have to be either frustratingly complex or stupidly simple? Skies of Arcadia is my favorite JRPG because it's the perfect middle ground in most things. There's a lot of things to discover and find in the overworld. Dungeons aren't too long, but they're not straight corridors either. Characters are interesting, but the game doesn't go out of its way to force you to watch cutscenes for an hour explaining why Vyse became a sky pirate, either.

The best games are the games that do everything just right, and usually 'just right' doesn't mean 'push it to the extreme'.

[Anonymous No.4884952]

>>4884821
>Defending games that are unapologetically linear

[Anonymous No.4884965]

>>4884640
>You all bitch and moan about FFXIII being somehow a moviegame and a corridor simulator but will defend FFIV for being the same exact thing because there's some overworld map tiles you can stroll around in?
Is it ok if I tell you I also hated FFIV?

[Anonymous No.4885007]

>>4882706
>The contention seems to be between having things like classes which distinguishes roles, and over-customization which leaves characters the same.
Just make more systems like FFV and FFT. Those two games did it best. DQIII too. If I had a job system in a new game I'd eat it up. It's a mechanic that never, ever gets old.

[Anonymous No.4885110]

>>4884952
Where did I say that? Greentext it.

[Anonymous No.4885160]

>>4884952
Some games are fine when completely linear (see: SMB1). Although it's true that there are even NES-era platform games with non-linearity like Megaman or at least branching, like Super Mario Brothers 3.

The problem with making a JRPG too linear is that it kills an important part of the roleplay element. Videogames have never been able to replicate a real tabletop roleplay experience, but they still have systems that implement some aspects of it. Being able to choose to go to different places is part of that roleplay element, even if it doesn't have a direct influence on the primary narrative.

[Anonymous No.4885240]

>>4882454
Games like paper mario where action timing, enemy placement, and certain threats like "goomba with a spiked hat: NO JUMP ATTACKS" were good ideas. Loved the paper series in general but obviously not super nuanced or advanced, just an example of some good ideas; or at least a good head space to be in when thinking of turn based combat.

[Anonymous No.4885495]

>>4885007
Well Bravely Default exists. It's a great modern game with a job system.

[Anonymous No.4885503]

>>4885495
Yeah, it sure is "great" fighting the same series of bosses over and over and over because they needed to fill up more game! haha

[Anonymous No.4885527]

>>4885503
Can't you beat the game after one cycle? You just have to grind bosses if you want the true ending. And Bravely Default's sidequests are actually better than its main quest, but I can see why you don't like it.

Bravely Second is better in that regard.

[Anonymous No.4885532]

>>4885527
>turn on gameplay video of Bravely Second
>hear cringey voice acting
nope

[Anonymous No.4885549]

>>4885532
You should've just said that you're not actually interested in anything new, you just want to whine about the good old days and refuse to acknowledge new things.

[Anonymous No.4885572]

>>4885549
No, there's new RPGs with good voice acting, like FFXII and Persona 5. This is just bad.

[Anonymous No.4885579]

>>4885532
>Expecting a Final Fantasy game to have good voices

[Anonymous No.4885586]

>>4885579

[Anonymous No.4885591]

>>4885586
>voiceS

[Anonymous No.4885601]

>>4885572
voice acting is what killed FF for me

[Anonymous No.4885606]

>>4885591
Gabranth wasn't bad.

[Anonymous No.4885612]

>>4885160
Should have said jrpg but you're right. Games like FF7 are mostly linear but give the illusion of an open world which is good enough. FFX, FFXIII just feels like you're being railroaded and you don't have to search for the next area, just folow a path

[Anonymous No.4885628]

>>4884810
>FFXIII is literally, LITERALLY a series of straight fucking corridors with cutscenes in between.
At least it doesn't try and pretend it's anything but that, can't say the same for many other FF, and despite that, FFXIII STILL gives you sidequests much like any other game would, but it trims off the fat in the sense that you don't have to wander around nothing or pick up you airship and spend minutes backtracking to whatever you should go, same concept, different execution, which I'll stress for the umpteenth time, is part of my original argument of how IMPLEMENTATION of a certain design is what matters most and not the design in itself.
FFIV is not different in structure other than giving you a very flimsy illusion that it is, most of your time in FFIV is also spent in literal corridors, more spacious than FFXIII for sure and sometimes you get a hall once in a while so you can stretch your legs, but they're still corridors nonetheless.
>>4884965
Sure, I can see where you come from.

[Anonymous No.4885990]

>>4884641
How is he not a Final Fantasy fan?

[Anonymous No.4886041]

>>4885628
> IMPLEMENTATION of a certain design is what matters most and not the design in itself
What matters most is the experience of playing the game.
> At least it doesn't try and pretend it's anything but that
FF4 is not "pretending" you dumb fuck. The story progression is linear. The game world is not. Simple as that.

From what I understand, both the story progression and game world of FF13 is linear. I haven't played FF13 but have heard a lot of people say that. The only one who hasn't is you. I might be inclined to take you at your word, except that you've demonstrated a crippling inability to understand the relevant concepts.

> FFIV is not different in structure other than the fact that its structure is different
Jesus, just stop. Not everyone plays these games with a spoiler walkthrough. The layout of the world matters.

> most of your time in FFIV is also spent in literal corridors
Except for the fact that this is just flatly false. I get what you're trying to say but you're just fucking wrong, even twisting the word "corridor" to mean "not actually a corridor but kind of like it in the sense that you have no other options of places to go." The first two discs of FF9 are like that. It's not "literal corridors" but the player is highly restricted in where they can go during that time.

Not to mention that saying that you spend time in "literal corridors" misses the point entirely. In Eye of the Beholder, the entire game is spent in "literal corridors" but the game is not "a corridor." It's a giant fucking maze.

[Anonymous No.4886186]

>>4884636
12 was pretty bad.

[Anonymous No.4886207]

>>4886186
XII is in the top 5 mainline FF games for sure. It has a few flaws keeping it from being #1, but overall it's an excellent game. XIII is in the bottom 5.

[Anonymous No.4886229]

>>4886207
>12
>top anything

Take that unfinished, wasteful game out of here. Also

>not /vr/

[Anonymous No.4886256]

>>4886041
>you dumb fuck
So, this was uncalled for... I regret getting personal in this case since you seem sincere. Still, I stand by everything else. I really don't think you understand these concepts.

[Anonymous No.4888258]

Bump

[Anonymous No.4889756]

>>4886207
based and redpilled.

[Anonymous No.4892275]

bump

[Anonymous No.4892331]

>>4885601
it'll probably ruin FFVII's remake too

[Anonymous No.4892386]

>>4881335
but no new games like PS1 FF so what gives

[Anonymous No.4892392]

>good longplays
There are various reasons as to why someone would watch a game without playing it themself.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPyoaSof_mM&list=PL6TWp0icAcsacViPrHFoLqpPElGdqLJGp

[Anonymous No.4892853]

>>4881312
The biggest problem with JRPGs is the turn-based combat, which becomes mindless and boring after a short period of time. It doesn't fit the mold right seeing that most of them aren't tactical/strategy games like the Ogre Battle series or Final Fantasy Tactics (which works well with those types of games, where you have ample time to think about your moves before you make them and there's no pressure from enemies attacking during the meantime). Doing something like turning the games into action RPGs like the Secret of Mana/Evermore games or doing quasi-turn-based/action RPGs like Vagrant Story (where you at least have to think about where you hit/what you're hitting the enemy with before you make a move and you can multiply damage by reflex-based button pressing and good timing). Those two changes would make JRPGs modern enough that they would be playable again for the most part.


>>4886229
It's certainly better than the mess that was the XIII series, that's for sure. I don't get how people on /vr/ can hate on XII without giving XIII the bashing it deserves for being a convoluted piece of shit on all fronts.

[Anonymous No.4892864]

>>4884530
>JRPGs are dead purely because the general public doesn't want them anymore.

100% false, they are dead simply because new good ones are not being made. jRPG fans have been thirsty for years, and Bravely Default's success proves it, even though it's extremely mediocre.

[Anonymous No.4892867]

>>4892853
Basically, FFXV was a great example of how to do a modern JRPG.

[Anonymous No.4892868]

>>4881312
Octopath Traveler is coming and Pokemon games still come out. Its not dead.

[Anonymous No.4892869]

>>4884610
The PC version has abysmal sales, it was in that leaked Steam data a few days ago.

[Anonymous No.4893067]

>>4881312
They are better than any movie "game" released nowadays. Kingdom Hearts III is the only shining light on an industry so fucked and convoluted.

[Anonymous No.4893137]

I really liked Chrono Cross of the fact it didn't have a tradional level system to grind. You could grind for materials all day, but 'leveling up' was entirely tied to your progression with bosses.

I just wish they had done more with that. Since most of the characters were interchangeable due to how the element system worked, I would have liked to see every area and boss tailored specifically to be challenging to the number of stars you had.

[Anonymous No.4893145]

>>4892853
I really liked FFX's combat system. Not having an active system made turn economy important (and speed actually mattered, unlike in FFVI where animation and menu buffering was a thing).

The issue with a lot of JRPGs I have is they give the player all these tools, but never really create situations where they're useful. The bosses are always immune to most of the status effects, and regular monsters tend to be rubbish and not worth spending the MP on.

[Anonymous No.4893219]

>>4893067
>expecting anything good to come from modern Square

[Anonymous No.4893227]

>>4893145
Paper Mario kinda solved this problem by making MP both scarce yet important since battles were like a puzzle, and you had to choose which moves to use to beat them in the least time possible. And since MP was kinda plentiful, you could use spells and such more generously. Bosses also could be put beneath status effects, so it didnt feel like you were just fighting an invulnerable monster.