Siliconera Sounds Off: Are JRPGs Being Phased Off Consoles?

By Ishaan . November 8, 2009 . 4:09pm

Now that everything is in order (finally!) and we’ve gotten debuting Facebook out of the way, it’s time to get Siliconera Sounds Off up off the ground. Here’s the premise: We’re going to have someone from the development side talk to us — us being no more than 2 SE staff members (we’ll rotate) — about matters pertaining to niche games and the industry issues that surround them. We’ll cover everything from sales to localization to design and more.

 

Joining us for our debut — and because he’s such a nice guy, he’s going to be a regular — is Nick Doerr, Script Editor for NIS America. Some of you might know him from the comments.

 

The topic we chose for this week is, "Have Japanese RPGs been (unfairly) phased off consoles?" and was originally suggested by Nick. Douzo, Nick-san.

 

http://www.siliconera.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/sso_nick.jpgNick: Arigatou, Ishaan-senpai (you’re probably older than me, and you’ve been doing this a while, so it seemed appropriate XD)!

 

The key word is "unfairly" when you ask if turn-based JRPGs have been phased off consoles. It’s impossible to deny they’ve become pretty slim pickings on the current generation of consoles, replaced by and large with more active, or more action-oriented, systems, but is that unfair? Let’s think of it in a couple of different ways.

 

The first way to think of it… is as an evolution of gaming. Turn-based battles, much like random encounters, are slowly being deemed "obsolete" and "archaic" gameplay mechanics. The truth in such claims is entirely subjective, and since this is an opinion piece, I’ll offer mine. That’s just nonsense. Turn-based battles can easily be tweaked into the most complex and strategic modes of combat available for RPGs, J or W. While starting to age visually, look at the Shin Megami Tensei titles, namely Nocturne, Digital Devil Saga, and Persona 3 & 4. All turn-based, all far more satisfying to conquer than any modern action-based RPG. It’s more in a game’s balance than the game’s mechanic itself. It’s a shame, but many turn-based games released lately on other platforms are simply too easy. That definitely makes the battle system boring, a chore, and disengaging. It also makes this reasoning against turn-based games unfair.

 

The second way to think of it… is from a marketing perspective. A bunch of new consoles have launched and gamers are growing intoxicated by large, flashy graphics and giant explosions (generalizing, but still). Turn-based RPGs are seen as more of a niche, even within RPG fandom, and they tend to have less pizzazz than most games. Why, then, risk placing such a title on these new consoles until a sizable RPG fanbase is obvious on one platform over another (or enough for a pleasant multiplat)? Everyone’s just waiting for enough RPGs to hit, but they’re mostly hesitant to release RPGs. Obviously, there’s a problem here, but it’ll get ironed out, I believe. These things usually get moving after Square Enix drops the Final Fantasy bomb. Worked for FFVII, worked for FFX, and it’ll probably work for FFXIII. But, strip away all the graphical prowess and pretty effects of FFXIII, and you’re left with little more than a battle system revolving around QTE’s. An action-oriented and vaguely timed system. This may set a trend against turn-based RPGs. Who knows. I think it’s unfair to let one game set the standard for an entire genre, and not quite fair that there’s some strange war of attrition between devs to release RPGs.

 

I think it’s an unfair cycle. Sure, I could get my fix on the DS or PSP, but there’s a limit to what can be implemented on those hardwares. Plus, I’m sick of staring at tiny screens with negligible resolutions. I’d love to see more turn-based JRPGs on current systems, but the industry and critics alike seem to be sweeping that mechanic aside as too old-fashioned. They’ll still come, but boy, expect the majority of them to be critically panned. Hooray, media influence.

 

http://www.siliconera.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/sso_ishaan.jpgIshaan: Sorry to disappoint; we’re the same age. (In fact, you might be a year older?) And you’ve been on this side of the industry as long as I have, so I’m hardly your senpai! Besides, you’re the cool one that gets to localize games now. Anyhow, onto RPG talk.

 

I’d have to say we’re in agreement that console JRPGs haven’t impressed of late. Aside from a couple publishers, it seems like the remaining lot have their priorities wrong. Either they’re trying too hard to appeal to the West (and not doing a very good job of it) or they’re still coming to terms with the newer hardware, and are focused entirely on producing graphical masterpieces that make people "ooh" and "aah" with their looks but offer little in the way of freshness or satisfaction. The problem, as you said, is that smaller publishers tend to look to the bigger guys for inspiration and setting trends. Unfortunately, instead of looking at, say, Atlus (who are (a) efficient and (b) innovative), they’re still looking to Square Enix and Final Fantasy, which they’ll never be able to emulate effectively since they don’t have Square’s budget nor the luxury of a four-year development cycle.

 

I feel the reason Atlus RPGs are so popular among our niche is because they don’t treat the player like he’s never experienced a role-playing game before. They know their niche, they know what we’re used to and what it takes to impress us, and they capitalize on that knowledge while balancing out resources. I think most of us are pretty forgiving of JRPGs in general and appreciative even of smaller advancements / refinements in the genre, like Rune Factory’s combination of Harvest Moon and traditional dungeon crawler design. Unfortunately, most publishers seem to be stuck in a past era where the sheer novelty of the genre was what brought in the fans. I will readily admit that the media are partly at fault as well. Square are releasing Crystal Bearers this fall, and it looks like a game that’s trying to break free of the stereotypes that the majority of Square games are bound by. Yet, few sites aside from ours have paid any attention to it, all the while expressing intense excitement for FFXIII, which looks like more of the same from Kitase and Co.

 

http://www.siliconera.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/sso_jenni.jpgJenni: I think I may be older than both of you. XD Anyways…

 

Both of you make very good and valid points that I totally agree with. Nick is absolutely right in that turn-based RPGs seem to be turning into a niche portion of the RPG genre, and companies tend to wait for a console to definite itself as the RPG system before really starting to develop games for it. If I stop and think about it, the only JRPGs for next gen systems I can think of are Eternal Sonata, Tales of Vesperia and the forthcoming Arc Rise Fantasia.

 

Ishaan also is absolutely correct when he says that developers and publishers are trying to appeal to the west. It seems like Mass Effect, Bioshock and Fallout 3 have made companies believe that that is the future of RPGs and quite possibly the only thing people are going to be wanting from console RPGs in the future. Even Square Enix has been attempting this, what with the two different versions of Nier and The Last Remnant. And, while Ishaan sees Crystal Bearers as possibly breaking free of stereotypes, I can’t helping thinking that it’s yet another Square Enix attempt to create a game that is geared towards the West. (I’m still excited about it, mind you, just a tad skeptical.)

 

Also, I’m not sure Square Enix and the almighty Final Fantasy XIII is going to be the force that determines the turn-based console this time around. For one thing, it’s taken Square Enix far to long to actually release it. Given how long it can actually take to make a quality turn-based RPG, the Xbox 720, PS4 and Wii 2 will likely be out by the time we finally start seeing a substantial flow of games. Second, like Nick said, FFXIII does look like it focuses on battles and QTEs, which isn’t really standard fare for turn-based RPGs. It’ll undoubtedly have a great and dramatic story, but it could end up creating a whole new path for turn-based JRPGS and RPGs in general.

 

I’m actually pleasantly surprised that the DS and PSP ended up becoming the JRPG systems for this generation of consoles and handhelds. While it does mean that the games may not reach their full potential due to hardware limitations, it’s an interesting shift. I think it says something about gamers in general, when the two portable consoles have become the go-to haven for RPGs. It shows that people want to be able to pick up and play RPGs anywhere they have time and perhaps also suggests that JRPG buyers are more interested in the story and core gameplay than fancy graphics.

 

Nick: There’s a lot to agree with in both your follow-ups. I forgot about the shift towards Westernization as Ishaan pointed out… have Japanese devs forgotten that the SaGa franchise, which always seemed to adopt a Western style of play, are practically panned universally in the West (personal preferences aside)? It might sound haughty, but in writing, one of the golden rules is to "write what you know." Why are devs trying to develop a style of game they can’t technically "know?" Dragon Quest seems to be just fine as-is, after all.

 

And as Jenni commented re: the PSP and DS… I can only hope that is exactly why people are gravitating towards handhelds. Some older 3D graphics (FFVII, for example) are extremely dated, but only early 3D games suffer that fate. PS2, Xbox, and Gamecube all have graphics that are fine, possibly forever.

 

Hmm… I really ought to plug NISA, huh? Even though there’s a dearth of turn-based JRPGs, NISA has been trickling them onto the PS3. Cross Edge, for example, uses a rather complicated turn-based system. NIS Japan also has Last Rebellion coming early next year, which is a throwback to more classic turn-based gameplay with modern tweaks. Atelier Rorona, due out in the Summer of 2010, while mostly focused on alchemy, has a basic turn-based system. Turn-based games exist, if they’re your cup of tea – you’ve just gotta look for them!

 

Ishaan: Right. When you think of westernization or localization, you think of Persona 4, where Atlus USA managed to preserve the personalities of the cast while making them relatable to western audiences. I think that’s as far as one needs to go when trying to gear a Japanese designed RPG to the West.

 

@Jenni: I agree, Crystal Bearers is definitely an attempt to appeal to the west. Keep in mind though; CB is produced by Akitoshi Kawazu (who also spearheaded the SaGa franchise), and like Nick said, those were closer to WRPGs in their open-ended nature. He seems to be their go-to man, when it comes to breaking the Square Enix mold.

 

I have to admit, I like the idea of more portable RPGs, too. It makes them easier to play and it gives me more incentive to actually play through them than having to sit in front of my TV for hours with a game that may or may not end up being worth it. Thankfully, when I look at portable games, I see that companies are more on the right track. Devil Survivor is fantastic, and both of Square’s Crystal Chronicles games are awesome fun. We’re even getting multiplayer RPGs on the DS, which is something not even the 360 has much of! Oh, and the fact that Luminous Arc 3 contains dating-sim elements and Fate/Extra looks like it’s drawing some inspiration from Persona 3 both make me very happy. Publishers are starting to experiment in this space.

 

So, here’s an interesting question: What do publishers need to do, to turn it around at this point in time? I have to admit Nick; NIS has had a lot of announcements of late. And as Jenni said, the short-term future of the Wii and Xbox are uncertain. Are people finally settling on the PS3 as the console for RPG development?

 

Nick: Oh, Ishaan, that’s such a loaded question to have aimed at me! =)

 

It’s difficult to say so objectively. I worked for a Sony-centric blog for a few years, and now I’m working with a company that deals predominantly with Sony. For what it’s worth, as far as console RPGs go, I think ultimately the PS3 will house not just the greatest number, but the widest variety of RPGs, just like in the past. I just find it silly to think otherwise, since Sony’s been the main console for these developers for the past dozen years. They have to know a large chunk of their fanbase are going to stick with that brand.

 

The only other dramatic shift in RPG console king…ness… was when Nintendo decided to keep cartridges for the N64 instead of keeping their deal with Sony and adding a CD drive (or Sony deciding to backstab them… whatever side of the fence you want to sit on). Developers wanted more space to play. Even in that regard, budget aside, it seems like the PS3 has the most space, as well. Logically speaking, it has all the ingredients to pull the most RPGs to it, but you can’t taste a cake by stuffing the ingredients in your mouth. You need to bake ‘em and see what happens. We need to see the games. The proof is in the pudding. Anyone else hungry?



  • urbanscholar
    Interesting read guys, its quite the treat to see someone's opinion on the subject from the industry. I remember writing and discussions with others about the same matter; it came down to what could be done for them to be more appealing. Even then that subject goes into a dichotomy. Personally speaking I look to my hand handle offerings and seemingly off shot games like crystal bearers for example.
  • Ereek
    The lack of mentioning of great turn-based battle systems that actually require strategy that even "grinding" won't help, like Breath of Fire: Dragon Quarter, makes me sad. Despite how many people seem to criticize the game, Dragon Quarter probably has the best turn-based battle system I've encountered in recent years. It not only requires planning ahead, but also knowledge of how battles work and the environment to be successful.

    But here's where the problem lies. This amazing system was attacked by all of the "fans" because it wasn't the same. It wasn't "standard" and Capcom "changed it up." I think a lot of JRPG players have a hard time accepting new things, much like with what happened with DQIX - and that wasn't even that much of a change!

    There's also a fine line of hypocrisy when it comes to turn-based battles. Let's compare two games: The Wizard of Oz: Beyond the Yellow Brick Road and Dragon Quest IV, the DS version. Reading a review for Oz, I see only "the battle system is boring" or "dry." For Dragon Quest in reviews I see "traditional" and "good if you enjoy it." For those of you who have played both, this is extremely strange, considering that the Wizard of Oz streamlines and modifies the basic Dragon Quest formula making it not only easier to input commands, but also adds "flavor" to the "aging" system. While neither battle system is spectacular, why is only Oz attacked for it?
  • BoF:DQ is actually one of my Top 10 Games Evarrr. I love it, and you're right. I just didn't think about mentioning it... but is it truly turn-based? It's a pretty clever mix of turn-based and action elements. Truly a hybrid of RPG sub-genre and probably what fanatics lambasted Capcom for. That or the stupid excuse of getting punished for using the Dragon transformation.

    I have zero complaints with that game overall, though. Well... it could've been longer, replays and extra scenes aside.
  • Joanna_T
    Anyone praising DQIV's battle system and then criticizing Wizard of Oz's battle system is a hypocrite. I love traditional turn-based battles, so I would probably enjoy Wizard of Oz (which I have yet to play). The only worry I have with it is that I hear it is rather easy. I tend to get a little bored if the game holds my hand the whole way through, but this has less to do with the battle system and more with the balance of the battles.

    I haven't played Dragon Quarter, but now you have made me interested. I've seen it for dirt cheap, so I'll probably pick it up now.
  • Ereek
    As for Oz, I heard it was easy, too, but was actually surprised to find my experience different. I was expecting to just breeze through battles, but enemies are certainly capable of killing you very quickly unless you "grind." In fact, the stronger enemies can kill you in about 1.5 hits (Ex: 120 damage and 150HP), but considering these enemies are always paired with the smaller enemies, you take damage very quickly. I learned my lesson very quickly that you have to pay attention in battle in new locations. I'd compare it to DQVIII, difficulty-wise, and VIII is an easy DQ. Basically, if you fight the battles when walking through the dungeons and don't run/avoid them, you'll be fine.

    I recently got the game for $18 during the sale on Amazon and it was completely worth it. Beautiful music and stunning graphics that add to the atmosphere. I'm not sure if it's worth $30 to everyone, I beat it in around 15 hours, but I got my money out of it and can see myself playing it again in the future.

    And you definitely should get Dragon Quarter. It has an amazing "artificial" atmosphere. What I mean by that is that the game gives you the feeling that your time is limited and you will die if you don't hurry. While it is true that if you wander around aimlessly for about 20 hours this will eventually happen, you can get through the entire game, clearing all side areas, without getting your gauge beyond 25% - so it offers a lot of freedom. This is what everyone complains about, but it's an "artificial" timer that adds to the atmosphere. Capcom did a brilliant job with it. Not to mention the battle system and music - one of Sakimoto's best works, easily.
  • Aoshi00
    I alrdy imported Oz many months ago but didn't finish it. I also found it difficult as it was necessary to grind for coins to get yourself more well equipped, as regular enemies could kill you easily (even if you make a wrong move in one turn) and restorative items are hard to come by, though Dorothy has a healing spell, also the more useful spells weren't easy to obtain unless you face the dragon master like a mini-boss. I don't understand how some could say the game was easy at all. I know the game was on sale on Amazon for ~18 one day and I missed it.. it was definitely not worth $30, but I wanted to get it for cheap and give it a second chance.
  • Ereek
    For me the motivation to finish Oz was simply the experience. I loved the atmosphere in the different levels. In fact you may say the levels themselves were my motivation. The battle system ended up annoying me after some time, but the entire package was worthwhile for the atmosphere and designs. It's corny, but I'd say the game's world did, in fact, feel "magical" and beautiful. It's a very impressive feat for something like that to be said of a DS game, especially when the DS doesn't have the most amazing 3D graphics.

    Of course, I can't say everyone else will have the same experience with the game.
  • Jirin
    The DQ battle system was inventive but it was also tedious. Maybe you like slogging through a two hour long dungeon with no save points, then using the scenario overlay and slogging through the exact same dungeon again. I prefer a little less repetition than that.

    Repetition is another reason people are getting tired of turn based RPGs. Some people have tremendous patience for grinding. You know them. They post on message boards bragging about their level 9999 Laharl. They start up a game and don't consider themselves finished until they've found every last secret and maxed out every stat on every character. But those people are the exception. Most people don't want to fight the same battles over and over just clicking options on menus.
  • Ereek
    How is a JRPG Turn-based battle system any more tedious than an ARPG system or even a pure FPS? I love Demon's Souls, but that can get just as tedious as any turn-based system. Parasite Eve 2 has greater enemy, skill and location variety than any of the early Resident Evil games, and both (Resident Evil and Parasite Eve 2) ended up tedious after the halfway point. Fighting games can be considered tedious because you're required to spend time playing the same character for hours and hours at a time, sometimes feeling like you're making very little progress in actually "learning" them.

    Any game can be defined as tedious. Dragon Quarter is no more tedious than any other dungeon crawler - that's what it is and it doesn't pretend to be anything else. At least its battle system is something that isn't mindless.
  • Jirin
    Ok, you caught me. I agree, FPSes and other genres can be just as tedious as turn based RPGs. When I play games like Bioshock it gets to the point where I feel like all I'm doing is pointing and shooting without any thought. It really depends on the game. The key to being tedious is in two aspects: Lack of thought, and slowness. Action RPGs often have a lack of thought (Don't get me started on Star Ocean 4), but at least they're moving quickly. And Demon's Souls can be repetitive, but if your brain stops paying attention, you're going to die.

    Whereas in a Final Fantasy game (Or 90% of the turn based RPGs made since 1997 that expect to sell more than 100,000 copies) it's not only thoughtless, you have to wait like half a minute in between every action.

    The thing that I think makes Dragon Quarter especially tedious is the scenario overlay system. I don't really feel like starting the game over again and again with slightly higher stats each time. And it's utterly ridiculous to have a dungeon that takes two hours and doesn't have any save points, with enemies that are easy but only kill you because they slowly wear down your healing supply with no chance to replenish. The combat may have more strategy than a Final Fantasy game in that you're not just choosing the biggest summon you have over and over and healing, but not nearly as much as any SMT game. SMT games, by the way, will kill you just as much, only they actually have checkpoints scattered around the dungeons so you only lose like half an hour progress tops.

    So yes, I'd much rather play Dragon Quarter than say, Final Fantasy X. But why play either when I've got an SMT game? Or an SRPG? Or an NES sitting right there in my closet with a lot of fast moving, difficult games, just ready to be dusted off and plugged in?
  • Aoshi00
    I agree w/ the repetition issue. I could play those kind of games like DQ when I was a kid, I had a friend who grinded Dragonball Z 2 on the Famicom for the whole summer, everyone w/ HP 9999 and the Freeza fight was a cinch, back then we took pride doing that (in grade school), but I absolutely can't stand grinding now. I didn't have that issue w/ Lost Odyssey though even w/ the loading because it just felt so long since I've played a true turn based RPG and the battles were fun.

    I've been saying the same thing about Wizard of Oz all along, the DQ battles weren't the problem, there was virtually no story and the characters felt bland, so there isn't even a single reason to grind, like see through the story's ending.

    I also prefer playing games on a big TV comfortably rather than straining my eyes on a portable, so even though there are so many RPGs on the DS/PSP, I rarely go to them. As for sitting in front of the TV for hours, how is that different than putting dozens of hours slouching in front of a portable, the amount of time doesn't change.

    I'm aware of the development cost and all, but I find it weird people actually prefer to keep playing games w/ PS2 graphics or regress to even more primitive version. The technology has gone beyond that and already set a higher standard. So yeah, FF XIII might be a more traditional turn based RPG w/ HD graphics, I don't see anything wrong w/ that, I want that. The MMO-like FF XII was not bad, but if I honestly ask myself, was it fun to play, no it really wasn't that fun, it wasn't even a worthwhile experience. And I'm puzzled why people are disappointed and wanted XIII to go the XII route. It was basically an online RPG you play offline by programming your party w/ detailed gambits. I'm glad XIII goes back to the more traditional turn based and story/character driven (which some bash as melodrama...)
  • Ereek
    When I was younger I had some bordering on obsessive-compulsive tendencies when it came to pointless grinding and could do it for hours. Nowadays, not so much, but it's tolerable and can be fun with a good system. I love "grinding" job classes in FFV, FFT, and DQVII and skills Grandia. But when there's no "reward" to grinding other than leveling up and a few items here and there, it's dull, no matter the system.

    And, unless I'm mistaken, he was talking about Dragon Quarter ("Breath of Fire V") and not Dragon Quest. It's almost impossible to grind in Dragon Quarter and if you do, grinding doesn't do much anyway, which is the reason I mentioned the game in the first place.
  • Joanna_T
    "perhaps also suggests that JRPG buyers are more interested in the story and core gameplay than fancy graphics."

    I second this! I could care less about flashy graphics so long as gameplay is solid. Graphics can be a nice bonus, but they never make or break a game for me. I've also been a primarily handheld gamer so I've never been that into graphics, more into portability. I hate having to sit in front of the TV for hours on end.
  • I second this. I'm finding it increasingly hard to sit in front of the television even with good games. There's always something to distract you. I'll be very happy the day portable games reach the same level of ambition as console games. We're already starting to explore a lot of ideas in that space.
  • I third this. The last console games I spent tons of time with were Half-Life 2 and Tales of Vesperia. Other than that, I get bored just sitting and playing games on my TV, even if I enjoy them. But I always have my DS in my hands. I'm still grinding away on Chronotrigger. And I still play both Taiko games trying to get perfect scores. But I can play them for a few minutes, stop and do something else, and then keep playing. And I don't have to just sit on my couch for hours on end.
  • tim_mbp
    Me too.

    Another deciding factor for me is price. I just can not justify spending $299, let alone those ridiculous launch prices, on a PS3 and $60 for a new game. I love JRPGs, but am not prepared to spend that kind of money. Handhelds ftw.
  • I think another issue for JRPGs on consoles this gen is that the console war was basically a worst-case scenario for them. The west embraces the 360, which Japan simply doesn't want. Japan sorta goes with the PS3, but not all that much at first, and third parties don't generally do well on the Wii. It's a far cry from last gen, where everyone basically put everything on the PS2, which was winning everywhere.

    Last gen, if you were a JRPG fan, you had a PS2. It was that simple. Now we got the fanbase scattered. It's taking longer for these consoles to get to where there are enough people to support JRPGs. With games like Atelier Rorona and Ar Tonelico 3 coming out, we finally seem to be getting there.
  • Japan pretty much sticks with the handhelds now. If something relatively popular is released on a console, chances are it'll be released on DS or PSP at some point. I think that's the main thing - Japan is moving more towards handheld gaming, so of course there will be fewer JRPGs on the consoles.
  • wildarms
    Xedge?... hard battle system...? it was great and the best part of the game, and it didnt took me that long to understand it, 2 battles maybe?

    Well anyway :D, i wish luminous arc 3, summon night X, and fate/extra would come T_T, i love the first 2 seires, and fate/extra just looks so fun
  • Joanna_T
    Didn't Namco remake Summon Night 1 & 2 for the DS? I really want those two to come stateside because I adore SRPGs. Come on Atlus make it happen!

    Luminous is almost a given since Atlus brought over 1 & 2, and it's a Marvelous game (and they tend to make it out of Japan), so I am very optimistic about LA3.
  • Cross Edge's battle system was pretty simple for me as well, but unless you've played RPGs for a decent portion of your gaming career, it can appear overwhelming... which is one of the bigger criticisms it garnered in reviews, I believe.
  • wildarms
    lol gaming career xD, yeah it was a great system, i cant understand why ppl cryed so much about it, just because is "hard", i mean, they want new battle systems but when they have one nice battle system its just "too hard for them" *sigh* most of the reviewers must really train their brain (specially gamespot(also another good example is their monster hunter review. i always laugh when i read it -.- , lol i cant count how many ppl have insulted them already))
  • Since I started playing RPGs on the SNES with Breath of Fire, I was very attached to the "meat and potatoes" turn-based style of gameplay.

    Fast forward to 1998 when Parasite Eve was released and I became utterly enamored with the hybrid active defense/turn-based offense of the first Parasite Eve, only to be dissatisfied with the sequel's abandonment of the turn-based mechanic of the first game in favor of a bowdlerized Resident Evil alike system, which I felt was unnecessary.

    Japanese RPG developers must feel an intense pressure to develop a successful game, especially in this generation with no defined console for the game type which leads to experiments like The Last Remnant.

    I'd love to see less reliance on Western ideas and see a resurgence in the very Japanese style of development which leads to games like SMT, NamcoXCapcom, etc. Only then will they begin the slow climb out near obscurity that has plagued them for so many years.
  • Nyanyaan
    The large number of new gaming customers in with this generation and the large costs associated with 'flashy' new games has really screwed the scale and perception of the marketplace. I think these are among the several factors that have seen a change in the console JRPG.

    On the PS1, it was very possible for a US released JRPG (that did not have roman numerals in the title) to sell around 50k, reach its target audience and bring in enough to enable atlus, sony, enix or whomever to release the next JRPG. And the dominance of the PS1 in Japan always meant there was a 'next' JRPG. Today, even if 50k sales remains enough for a profit, sites like gamasutra or ign would label the title a failure as would be X% less than (your mass market game here) sold using the weekly NPD data.

    I love however, what the DS and PSP has enabled in the current market. The lower cost/higher customer base of these systems allows risk taking that we really didnt even see in the PS1 days. Visual novels are the biggest example of this -- a trend I hope can only continue. Then you've seen odd birds like Neverland Card Battles and Steambot Tournament, which never would have seen a domestic release even on the PS2.
  • Jirin
    I for one prefer playing games on the TV rather than handheld systems. I'd rather look at a big, beautiful, detailed screen than crane my neck and squint at a little rectangle I have to hold up to my face in an uncomfortable posture. I love Devil Survivor, but it's taking me months to get through just because I rarely want to play a handheld system.

    But, I do think turn based RPGs are going to go to handheld systems, and it's because of the one thing companies seem to overlook: Speed. Take Final Fantasies 4-6. There were no graphics, so everything moved quick. You cast a spell? The graphic lasted one or two seconds at most, and usually well under one. Everything happened so fast, you had to make decisions fast, and you could die very fast if you weren't careful. (Especially if you cranked up the speed like I did). Now, take all the Final Fantasies right after. You choose a regular attack. You pose, pose, swing your sword over your head, pose some more, jump toward the enemy at three different angles, pose, slash, pose, jump back, pose, and celebrate. Regular attacks took over 5 seconds, and summons could take upwards of two minutes. Even the most ardent FF7 fanboys must admit they couldn't stand waiting for the Supernova graphic.

    On DS, there's no impressive graphics to show up, so the speed is back, and with it the charm and excitement turn based RPGs had in the SNES era.

    That's also one of the things (Other than a bigger focus on tactics and strategy rather than just flashy graphics) that makes Shin Megami Tensei stand out. Graphics are so quick they're not nearly the drag on the experience they are in games like Lost Odyssey.
  • shion16
    i think in atlus games the battle system is not the main attraction,their games have a lot of attractions that takes more attention than the battles as the plot,minigames ,social system,good character designs etc....
    the same with dragon quest
  • @Ereek Dragon Quarter was awesome, I just hated the harsh game over and the limited saves. We are not play Resident Evil. I think Valkeria Chronicles made it better.
    Wild Arms 4 and 5 were awesome too. Grandia III was a disappointment, the first few hours were amazing when you are with your mom, then it goes downhill. Grandia II was on the other hand awesome, the battle system is the best ever (for all of them).
  • Vanilla
    I have to agree on Jenni's point about the graphics. I remember when Dawn of Mana came out, I was really excited because it looked absolutely gorgeous. I was disappointed when I found it to be a less-than-enjoyable experience.

    I have to slightly disagree on the idea that people might like portable RPG's better than TV ones. I personally have always loved sitting down in front of my TV to play a game like FFVII as opposed to on my PSP. I think it's just that the RPG's on handhelds so far have been substantially better than the ones on consoles so far this gen. I loved Devil Summoner, but it doesn't hold a candle to Persona 3 or 4 for me.

    I think devs are more willing to be experimental and ambitious on handhelds. You can reach a pretty large base of DS and PSP owners while generally keeping the budget lower than it would be for a console game.
  • JeremyR
    I think it's just a reflection of Japan. DS+PSP have a bigger user base and sales than Wii+PS3+360.

    You can look at monster hunter. Huge franchise on the PSP, the next installment was moved to the Wii instead. While it didn't flop, it only sold about 40% as much. (1 million vs 2.5 million?)

    Or look at Disgaea on the PSP vs PS3. The ports of the old games sold about as much as the original title on the PS3 did.

    Or look at 3D Heroes, despite the love it got in the western press, apparently it flopped, basically only 7700 copies sold. And they only shipped like 25,000. By comparison, that's about the same amount the game "Elminage II" did for the PSP, which probably didn't get any press (and got bad reviews in Famisu), a wizardry style dungeon crawler, looks like from the shots.

    That said, with the PS3 doing better in Japan, maybe sales of RPGs on it will pick up (Tales of Vesperia did pretty well).
  • malek86
    Genres have a lasting appeal. That's how it works. Take adventure games, they were extremely popular in the 90s, but they crumbled. Same deal with shmups. Now it's apparently the turn of turn-based RPGs (the irony). As customers change, so do games. Maybe in the future this will change again: adventures and shmups seem to have been seeing a slight resurgence as of lately, and who knows that maybe turn-based RPGs will become popular again with time.

    (as for me, I go by phases too: so there's a time when I can grind for hours a day, like the first half of this year, when I completed pretty much all the PS2 SMT games. And then there's a time when I can't stand grinding, like the second half of this year, when I'm only playing action games).

    It's true that the fault probably lies in the western market, who doesn't like turn-based stuff and prefers to be more actiony. Mind you, that's not necessarily bad. Despite my liking for japanese games, my top 10 is mostly comprised of western games. But it's kind of a problem when japanese developers try to imitate western ones. I say let the western developers do their job, which they can do pretty well. Unfortunately, with the shrinking japanese market, and enlarging western market, this doesn't seem to be an option. Even small companies like Atlus are looking toward the sea. There is not much one can do to turn it around. You gotta follow the market anyway. Or you could do try some different route. Just like how adventure games found a renewed success with digital distribution.

    Portable RPGs are not bad, but I have to admit, I'd rather have those where you don't have to grind. For example, a game like Shiren. So you can take it, play it for half a hour, die, and then put it back. Same deal with Knights in the Nightmare and its short missions: play a couple, turn off the system, wait until the next time. But for big-time grinding, like what I did in Digital Devil Saga, that's something I'd rather do with a standard joypad and a normal screen.
  • Half-Minute Hero is one of the most awesome games I've played all year, and I believe it could be on the Wii just as well the PSP, but obviously it's a great fit for a portable platform. When handheld consoles are so popular in Japan, it's obvious their favorite genre has followed there too.
  • With the reason of "seen before" being how some journalists decide to cast of most JRPGs as bad or just mediocre and fully openly love games like Fable 2 or Fallout 3 that do not just resemble their earlier versions but also have a lot of gameplay mechanics and storyparts that are mostly the same it is hard for me as a reader to understand what they are doing.

    It is sad to see that they knowingly decide to thrash the JRPG genre. It still has so much to give.

    I´m playing Agarest: Generations of War now and while I see a lot of resemblance to Cross Edge there are still so many variations that I just can´t seem to stop playing. It´s to much fun to play.

    Hearing that Luminous Arc 3 has dating elements in it is enough for me to take a closer look at it. I´m against handheld games since my hands apparently are to big for me to hold them comfortably. That and when I want to play I don´t stop after few hours, I play them for 2-8 hours straight with just taking breaks to eat or use the toilet. And having to watch that small screen, holding it right is hard for my hands.

    That way I want them to be on console that I can use a television to play them. It is my prefered way of playing.

    But with all great titles that are appearing on the handheld systems I don´t have much of a choice, I need to buy some of them at least.

    To the topic: As things are now, then yes the JRPG genre is forced to be put off consoles. The variety of things that have been said as reasons all apply. But for people like me that have nothing against turn based combat or if the game should be a little bit to easy then I´m crying inside for the lack of games.

    Cross Edge is terrible in that sense that you have to be perfectly fine with strategy, otherwise you´re dead. The weapon/armour rate is also bad. I´m at lvl 8 and then all of a sudden I get to face lvl 10 enemies that do 1000 worth of HP damage in one attack each round?

    That amount of luck that is needed for them NOT to do that attack is not something I want to see in a JRPG as it destroys the game.

    Or like in Agarest: The skill counter when I first encountered it killed 50% of my team in one hit just because I wasn´t carefull. Having a physical attack countered for in this case more damage than the enemy can lash out or I can lash out in a single attack is horrible.

    So while this gives a new level of challange. It is a dead center for why some people do not like the genre as they seem to think all games are like this.

    Which they of course aren´t. Wanting to see what Atlus can do with a new Persona title :)
  • Xeahnort
    I hate how in this gen the graphics whores have been bashing niche RPGs and greats developers like N1 and GUST get shot down for not following the HD trend. Rpg's are built on mostly story, then gameplay.
  • Marcus70
    This question is for Nick Doerr:

    Nippon Ichi created several SRPGs for the PS2: Disgaea, Disgaea 2, Phantom Brave, La Pucelle and Makai Kingdom.

    After three years, Nippon Ichi has only created one SRPG for the PS3: Disgaea 3

    Do you plan to make any more SRPGs for the PS3? And if so when?

















  • Jirin
    Oops, meant to post in reply.
  • rinshu
    I'm amazed all three of them held that discussion without bringing up on of the main reason the JRPGs are primarily on the DS and PSP this generation. They are the systems that are selling in Japan. Every generation the JRPGs usually gravitate towards the system with the biggest installed user base. And this gen its the DS. It makes perfect sense that's where the JRPGs are. Add to that the relatively low cost for developing a DS JRPG as opposed to a PS3/360 and its a no brainer why the JRPGs are where they are for the most part.

    So to me the fascination isn't with the move of the JRPGs from consoles to handhelds. The real interesting thing is why did the Japanese as a society move from console to handhelds?
  • ElTopo
    I think the relatively low cost for developing on the PSP and DS are the main reasons they are so much more successful. The Wii market seems to be over saturated, not too mention that many core non-first party titles just don't seem to sell as well on the Wii.
  • cowcow
    Its actually cheap/cheaper to develop on the 360 which is why you see more Japanese niche titles on it than the PS3, but the problem is no one in Japan really cares for the 360.
  • Yep, there seems to be a bit of unbalance there, but it still has a fighting chance. The PR needs to be a little more aggressive and build the confidence they need to sell these games on the system. I want to see them have some success because I find what games they're making to be really interesting.
    I think Famitsu even had an article of "10 Xbox Games we like!". I can't recall what exactly which games showed up, but I wouldn't be surprised if it were half Japanese based games and the other half western based.
blog comments powered by Disqus
Siliconera Tests
Siliconera Videos
I'm Feeling Lucky

 


Playtests

Post 52620 Post 52237 Post 52186