Why end 80s/earlier 90s JRPG's so different than modern ones?

[Thac0]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moe_(slang)

This is why it happened. Why Moe happened no one knows. It is eternal.

I prefer old school JRPGs more aswell, but saying all went to shit is kinda autistic. Just take a look at https://atlus.com/games/, good shit is still being made.

 

[Cryomancer]

Criticizing anime culture =/= weird autistic obsession with not using swords and poorly informed generalizations.

Swords are overrated. His only utility is only as a backup weapon. Polearms are amazing battlefield weapon, amazing hunting weapon and decent anti armor weapon(not good as a war hammer). Axes are amazing tool to cut wood, decent to deal with armor(not as good as a hammer). Bows are amazing weapons to hunt and in Battle of Agincourt, a small number of British longbowman defeated heavily armored Frenchman in higher numbers. Firearms too. Oda Nobunaga had a huge success using Tanegashima and you don't see that weapon in any JRPG.

If we are playing a high fantasy game, i wanna use supernatural powers. If we are playing a sci fi game, i wanna use cool sci fi stuff. I have no problem with non magical medieval games like M&B. In fact, be a knight impaling enemies with my spear is so satisfying... I just think that force the player to use a weapon is a bad thing. And it applies outside of RPG's.

Imagine if you had to pray Battlefield with a SMG and there are no way to use any other weapon. It would be extremely annoying. Now imagine if 99% of the shooters only had SMG's to chose from.

 

[Thac0]

Criticizing anime culture =/= weird autistic obsession with not using swords and poorly informed generalizations.

Swords are overrated. His only utility is only as a backup weapon. Polearms are amazing battlefield weapon, amazing hunting weapon and decent anti armor weapon(not good as a war hammer). Axes are amazing tool to cut wood, decent to deal with armor(not as good as a hammer). Bows are amazing weapons to hunt and in Battle of Agincourt, a small number of British longbowman defeated heavily armored Frenchman in higher numbers. Firearms too. Oda Nobunaga had a huge success using Tanegashima and you don't see that weapon in any JRPG.

Hating on Swords has become so popular due to pop history youtubers that they are underrated at this point... There was a reason they were one of the most common weapons all through histoy, second only to the spear and the mace. Do you think the Roman legions would wear Gladiuses (Gladii?) into battle as their main weapon if they werent trendemoudly usefull? Bladed weapons are easy to carry, easy to conceal, easy to use and inflict massive damage against lightly armored opponents like bandits and animals, the threats facing middle age commoners the most.

Also what JRPGs are you playing where Firearms and Bows are rare weapons? Poleweapons, especially pikes and long spears are also super common, thanks to the Dragoon stereotype. Id argue even axes appear often, due to the hotheaded idiot archetype often carrying a maul or an axe.

 

[mushaden]

Because the edgelords in this thread don't understand that those games were made for a niche of otakus, while what you're playing now is probably made for a mainstream audience. If you want the hardcore experience, go play the hardcore stuff, not complain about goddamn final fantasy.

This is the dumbest possible kind of elitism, is like only going to the cinema to watch superhero movies and then posting about how the art of cinema has declined.

I have always been under the impression that the old final fantasy and dragon quest games were made for school children. Is that just wrong?

 

[Cryomancer]

here was a reason they were one of the most common weapons all through histoy, second only to the spear and the mace. Do you think the Roman legions would wear Gladiuses (Gladii?) into battle as their main weapon if they werent trendemoudly usefull?

They are mostly facing enemies with no armor and gladius is only a effective weapon if combined with the Scutum And they used "hasta"(spear) too, Hastalis was very common Hastati

And i always preferred ranged weapons and polearms over swords, since my childhood. The historical youtube videos only promoted my preferences.

Bladed weapons are easy to carry, easy to conceal, easy to use and inflict massive damage against lightly armored opponents like bandits and animals

So are SMG's. But a 9mm submachine gun is not the standard battlefield weapon in modern times.

And sorry but most weapons used on jrpg's don't seem very "easy to conceal"

some images

But here is my point. On WRPG's, i can be anything. From a knight impaling enemies with my horse and spear to a lich. I don't see the same variety on "JRPGs"[/spoiler]

 

[felipepepe]

But here is my point. On WRPG's, i can be anything. From a knight impaling enemies with my horse and spear to a lich. I don't see the same variety on "JRPGs"

Saying dumb shit like this continues to prove you never even bothered to look.

There are JPRGs where you can transform your characters in Liches (Tactics Ogre: Knight of Lodis). Moreover, JRPGs offer the craziest protagonists: a boy helping Lucifer defeat God, a life form evolving across history, a Valkyrie preparing for ragnarok, a squad of WW1 heroes, androids in a post-apoc world, a demon overlord defending his throne, sky pirates, dudes riding giant robots, school kids invading dreams, time travelers, the last magic user on earth, an alchemist enslaving demons, a cop in New York, several types of monster tamers, eco-terrorists a literal fucking dragon... FFS, you can even play as Mario, or help Mickey Mouse save the world.

All this for you to come here and complain that there are too many swords and no variety "like a knight and a lich". Stop posting about shit you clearly know nothing about, you are just embarrassing yourself.

 

[Cryomancer]

There are JPRGs where you can transform your characters in Liches (Tactics Ogre: Knight of Lodis). Moreover, JRPGs offer the craziest protagonists: a boy helping Lucifer defeat God, a life form evolving across history, a Valkyrie preparing for ragnarok, a squad of WW1 heroes, androids in a post-apoc world, a demon overlord defending his throne, sky pirates, dudes riding giant robots, school kids invading dreams, time travelers, the last magic user on earth, an alchemist enslaving demons, a cop in New York, several types of monster tamers, eco-terrorists a literal fucking dragon... FFS, you can even play as Mario, or help Mickey Mouse save the world.

Amazing. Can you name this games?

 

[felipepepe]

SMT: Nocturme, E.V.O.: Search for Eden, Valkyria Profile, Vaklyrie Chonicles, Nier: Automata, Disgaea, Skies of Arcadia, Xenogears, any Persona, Chrono Trigger and Radiant Historia and Final Fantasy XIII-2, Final Fantasy VI, Parasite Eve, any Pokémon or Digimon or Monster Racher game, Final Fantasy VII, Breath of Fire series, Super Mario RPG, Kingdom Hearts...

 

[pocahaunted]

One thing to note, though, is that in pretty much every single one of those games you're essentially forced to play in that role, which reduces roleplaying potential quite a bit, depending on how you look at it.

 

[Karellen]

One thing to note, though, is that in pretty much every single one of those games you're essentially forced to play in that role, which reduces roleplaying potential quite a bit, depending on how you look at it.

"Depending on how you look at it" is very much the thing here. On the whole, in any RPG you can't play as anything that developers haven't specifically intended for you to play, and most of the freedom you have is pretty cosmetic. Besides, a lot of the best western RPGs actually have fairly specific main character roles with prescribed goals and concerns, with the high end of the spectrum being "scarred formaldehyde-smelling amnesiac immortal with tragic past searching for a way to die".

For all practical purposes, I don't think that having a defined main character is strictly an impediment to roleplaying; to some extent it's a necessary precondition to it. I'm quite fond of the way games like Wing Commander do things, where you play as a specific pre-defined character, but within the given bounds your choices affect both the story and, ultimately, what kind of person that character is. This is the kind of thing that JRPGs do when they happen to have narrative choices, and some of them do it quite well.

Now I'm actually quite fond of games where you play a player-generated murderhobo, but I feel like, to me, they are fantasy comfort food; it's not so obvious to me that this necessarily leads to greater roleplaying freedom, because for the most part the game doesn't care what your character is, and to be perfectly honest, neither do I.

 

[pocahaunted]

For sure, I feel like most games that tend to allow you more freedom in terms of which role you take, end up being so diluted and bland in the story department, that it's often not worth it, especially when AI is often dumb and doesn't really adapt.

I consider Ultima Online one of the most interesting RP experiences you can(could) have on PC, which I'm sure most will disagree with.

 

[Thac0]

here was a reason they were one of the most common weapons all through histoy, second only to the spear and the mace. Do you think the Roman legions would wear Gladiuses (Gladii?) into battle as their main weapon if they werent trendemoudly usefull?

They are mostly facing enemies with no armor and gladius is only a effective weapon if combined with the Scutum And they used "hasta"(spear) too, Hastalis was very common Hastati

[/spoiler]

The thing in the picture is a Pilum. Roman Military Tactics was yeet a throwing spear at your enemy while charging with your massive shield protecting you from longer range missile fire like bows, then murder them in meelee with a short sword while relying on superior armor. In fact Roman throwing spears were manufactured in such a way they became stuck in shields to make them useless, and the enemy even weaker in melee. Also your own wikipedia link shows that Hastati were spearmen at first, but switched to swordsmen because the sword was better for their use.

And sorry but most weapons used on jrpg's don't seem very "easy to conceal"

I am not arguing that the sword as used in JRPGs is a good weapon, I am arguing that the sword isnt overrepresented in all kinds of RPGs because it was an amazing weapon and was used immensively all across history. The weird fixation this thread has about swords has no point.

But here is my point. On WRPG's, i can be anything. From a knight impaling enemies with my horse and spear to a lich. I don't see the same variety on "JRPGs"

Now here is the juice. JRPGs go about this a lot differently than WRPGs. In a JRPG every character tends to have a fixed weapon, and he can only wear weapons of that type. Cid in Final Fantasy usually only wears hammers (or Spears in FF VII for god knows why) Yangus in Dragon Quest wears axes and similar weapons, Joker in Persona 5 only wields daggers, Sue from Grandia wields Bows etc etc. And before someone comes nagging that Sue can wield clubs or whatever, usually the have 2-3 similar weapon types dedicated and can choose from those.The choice is not which weapons those characters wear, the choice is which character you take in your team to have which weapons. WRPGs instead let anyone wield anything. It is not that JRPGs have less choice there, there choice is only at a different location. There is a respectable amount of different weapon types in most mayor JRPGs.

random weapon list citations
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/pc/235919-dragon-quest-xi-echoes-of-an-elusive-age/faqs/76716/weapons
https://rankedboost.com/persona-5/best-weapons-armor/
https://etrian.fandom.com/wiki/Weapons_(EON)

 

[Norfleet]

The entire "X character uses Y weapon" thing actually is an artifact of AD&D, where characters had "weapon proficiencies" in specific weapons and fighters had "weapon specialization", which effectively locked them into a specific weapon, as their performance with other weapons became so bad in comparison. This same practice actually still occurs in western games, like in Diablo II where a Barbarian typically buys a single weapon specialization which thus locks him into that weapon, then proceeds to double down on that even more by planning an entire build around that specific class of weapons, or even one VERY SPECIFIC weapon.

 

[Cryomancer]

Now I'm actually quite fond of games where you play a player-generated murderhobo, but I feel like, to me, they are fantasy comfort food; it's not so obvious to me that this necessarily leads to greater roleplaying freedom, because for the most part the game doesn't care what your character is,

For sure, I feel like most games that tend to allow you more freedom in terms of which role you take, end up being so diluted and bland in the story department, that it's often not worth it, especially when AI is often dumb and doesn't really adapt.

That is completely wrong. On Baldur's Gate 2 : SoA, if you are a sorcerer, people treat you completely different than if you are a bard, you even get different strongholds and complete different side quests.

Baldur's Gate 2 if you are forced to play as a anime swordsman would be so boring (yes, people homebrewed this subclass on 5e https://www.dndbeyond.com/subclasses/39530-anime-swordsman )

As for story, i don't see much mature themes on JRPG's either. For eg, on Fallout New Vegas, we had a discussion of Mr House vs NCR, the good guys and bad guys are quite obvious on most JRPG's. And instead of a more local conflict which is far more relatable, the story is almost always trying to save the world. And defeating a sci-fi empire with fast swinging blades. On Icewind dale, you have Chaotic inclined barbarian tribes and small cities trying to bevent a tyrant from unifying the region.

The entire "X character uses Y weapon" thing actually is an artifact of AD&D

Except that in D&D you can choose what weapon to have specialization. And swords are ineffective vs golems.

sword was better for their use.

To fight unarmored human opponents at CQB. Gladius depends a lot on the shield to be effective.

sword isnt overrepresented in all kinds of RPGs because it was an amazing weapon and was used immensively all across history

Was mostly used as backup weapons. Not as main hunting weapon, nor as main anti armor weapons.

And in a universe where people can create living rocks, this type of weapon would't be effective vs golems. 2e exists far before historian guys on youtube and plate armor has way better AC vs slashes than vs blunt.

 

[Machocruz]

The entire "X character uses Y weapon" thing actually is an artifact of AD&D, where characters had "weapon proficiencies" in specific weapons and fighters had "weapon specialization", which effectively locked them into a specific weapon, as their performance with other weapons became so bad in comparison. This same practice actually still occurs in western games, like in Diablo II where a Barbarian typically buys a single weapon specialization which thus locks him into that weapon, then proceeds to double down on that even more by planning an entire build around that specific class of weapons, or even one VERY SPECIFIC weapon.

Player gets to choose their specialization, in these examples, which is unlike Wakka only getting to fight with a ball, decided by the developer. Not necessarily a problem in a party game, if the weapon types are cool. But a beach ball is fucking lame, just like the character. I hated that game.

 

[Sigourn]

Moreover, JRPGs offer the craziest protagonists: a boy helping Lucifer defeat God, a life form evolving across history, a Valkyrie preparing for ragnarok, a squad of WW1 heroes, androids in a post-apoc world, a demon overlord defending his throne, sky pirates, dudes riding giant robots, school kids invading dreams, time travelers, the last magic user on earth, an alchemist enslaving demons, a cop in New York, several types of monster tamers, eco-terrorists a literal fucking dragon... FFS, you can even play as Mario, or help Mickey Mouse save the world.

I think this is a very misleading argument. Sure, JRPGs offer a lot of variety in their main characters. But I think it's pretty clear that he was talking about variety within a game, and that isn't what JRPGs became known for.

This is of course disregarding the fact that "a demon overlord defending his throne" translates to

Spoiler

And that explains why many a Codexer doesn't find JRPG's variety in settings particularly interesting.
This is also true for JRPG fans who claim that WRPGs are always "bald military dude": they can't see past the realistic aesthetic and they see what they want to see.

 

[Cryomancer]

To be fair, some JRPG protagonist seems cool and interesting. Vincent Valentine from Dirge of Cerberus. One colleague of mine who is now working in the army always hated final fantasy games, but he liked Dirge of Cerberus

img and gameplay

The unique nonsensical thing on Vincent Valentine design is that the barrel of the gun seems to use a different caliber than the "cylinder". If you look to the cylinder, seems that the revolver uses a small caliber cartridge. If you look to the size of barrel, seems that the revolver uses a caliber that would be considered a destructive device on US.

Is not JRPG, but Alucard from Hellsing is amazing in design.

 

[Norfleet]

Swords are overrated. His only utility is only as a backup weapon. Polearms are amazing battlefield weapon, amazing hunting weapon and decent anti armor weapon(not good as a war hammer). Axes are amazing tool to cut wood, decent to deal with armor(not as good as a hammer).

Yes, but the thing is, adventurers are pretty much guys who fight with their sidearms. Battlefield weapons are used on a battlefield, in ranks of guys who have similar weapons and against guys in ranks who do the same. An adventureman is a guy who finds himself in irregular actions against varied enemies and non-battlefield terrain. You don't carry a BATTLEAXE into a bar (maybe you do in orcish culture). You don't try to fight with a halberd in an alleyway or a dungeon tunnel. A sword is a versatile weapon, you can use it to thrust in enclosed space, and swing in more open spaces, whereas trying to do this with a warhammer limits your options. A sword is a sidearm, like an officer's pistol. It is for this same reason that adventure heroes in a modern setting use pistols and not rifles. Do you see Indiana Jones and James Bond carrying rifles everywhere? No, they use pistols, just as the fantasy adventureman uses swords.

 

[Cryomancer]

Yes, but the thing is, adventurers are pretty much guys who fight with their sidearms.

Swords are actually extremely expensive for the average medieval guy. Using as everyday weapon is ok, using to hunt bears and explore the wilderness is another thing. Also, you are overexagerating the portability of a sword. You can have a short axe with 40cm length and it will not be awful vs armor like a sword. Same in modern times, you can have a bullpup short barrel rifle inside a overcoat. It will not be better than a anti materiel rifle vs armored personnel and vehicles but will certainly be better than a 9mm pistol.

The idea of someone using a sword against a dragon in a fantasy setting is awful like someone using a 9mm pistol to fight a Panzer V IRL instead of a weapon like PTRD 1941. When people go search a Bear to hunt, they generally use spears, warbows, traps, etc on medieval times and hunting rifles in modern times.

Talking about weapons on medieval time, many places DEMANDED that every adult male had a weapon to serve in the city militia when necessary. Talking about fantasy, i see no problem with every house having a spear and a battleaxe in Icedale setting. Not every high fantasy society is sword coast monarchy...

, and swing in more open spaces, whereas trying to do this with a warhammer limits your options

A spear can be used in narrow parts. Just thrust forward. A halberd, just grab the weapon closer to the blade. You don't need to do 360º swings;

 

[Norfleet]

Swords are actually extremely expensive for the average medieval guy.

The average medival guy is a peasant and can't afford any kind of actual weapon, so is probably using some kind of farming implement improvised into a weapon. That...doesn't really cover the typical Adventureman.

Also, you are overexagerating the portability of a sword. You can have a short axe with 40cm length and it will not be awful vs armor like a sword.

True, but on the other hand, your average opponent does not have much in the way of armor, and the sword has better reach when thrusting. If you're getting into fights with armored opponents, you are probably on a battlefield.

Same in modern times, you can have a bullpup short barrel rifle inside a overcoat.

Ah, yes, the Trenchcoat of Inconspicuousness. If you try this, the police may give you trouble. On the other hand, if you are carrying your pistol inside your suit jacket, at least here in the US, this is legal in many places.

The idea of someone using a sword against a dragon in a fantasy setting is awful like someone using a 9mm pistol to fight a Panzer V IRL instead of a weapon like PTRD 1941.

The idea of someone using ANY kind of hand weapon against a dragon is pretty absurd, period. If you're going get into fights with dragons, you probably want to bring along a ballista. And you're still going to be carrying your sword, just because it's the generic sidearm.

When people go search a Bear to hunt, they generally use spears, warbows, traps, etc on medieval times and hunting rifles in modern times.

Yes, which makes sense, since these people are specifically looking for a specific form of trouble, and therefore, are carrying specific tools for the job: Not even ordinary spears, but specific boar spears that have a crossbar on it to stop impaled boars from getting to you.

A spear can be used in narrow parts. Just thrust forward. A halberd, just grab the weapon closer to the blade. You don't need to do 360º swings;

Yes, spears are very practical weapons and don't get nearly enough love, but you know what a spearman often also carries? A sword, for stabbing people in situations where the spear has been counteracted in some way. Because swords are extremely convenient sidearms like that. The spear is basically the equivalent of your medieval battle rifle, and an adventureman expecting to get into fights will probably bring one along. It is not, however, a subtle or inconspicuous thing to carry, and is unsuited for the 1v1 fights an adventureman often finds himself in. A 1v1 with two guys with spears and shields is basically a stalemate broken only when somebody pulls out their sword. But I agree, it's very much underrepresented in games, spears should pretty much be the primary weapon. But you're definitely still gonna have a sword, as your sidearm.

 

[Karellen]

Now I'm actually quite fond of games where you play a player-generated murderhobo, but I feel like, to me, they are fantasy comfort food; it's not so obvious to me that this necessarily leads to greater roleplaying freedom, because for the most part the game doesn't care what your character is,

For sure, I feel like most games that tend to allow you more freedom in terms of which role you take, end up being so diluted and bland in the story department, that it's often not worth it, especially when AI is often dumb and doesn't really adapt.

That is completely wrong. On Baldur's Gate 2 : SoA, if you are a sorcerer, people treat you completely different than if you are a bard, you even get different strongholds and complete different side quests.

Baldur's Gate 2 if you are forced to play as a anime swordsman would be so boring (yes, people homebrewed this subclass on 5e https://www.dndbeyond.com/subclasses/39530-anime-swordsman )

The great majority of Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 treats your character as a generic D&D adventurer, leading a party of other D&D adventurers, except for the parts that treat you as Charname, Gorion's Ward, the Bhaalspawn. In the grand scheme of things, the impact of character class in pretty small, because it's a party-based RPG about doing D&D things - which is actually kind of funny, because there aren't that many character types a D&D game has to cater to. In any case, if you played Baldur's Gate 2 with a modded "anime swordsman" class, even if you had an extra anime swordsman questline, it would still be basically the same game, and whether it is boring or not is a function of whether the things you do in Baldur's Gate are boring or not.

Playing party-based D&D games is fun to a large extent because of how archetypical that experience is, though, and Baldur's Gate is a very decent game about having D&D adventures. But it's not particularly wizard-y. Even on the cRPG end of things, if I particularly felt like playing a wizard specifically, wouldn't I rather go for a game like Geneforge, where you are treated as a wizard 100% of the time, and where the entire quest and story element has been specifically designed to be about magic and wizards? I'm not sure why I'm supposed to be more impressed by a game that isn't about those things, but now and then throws me a bone on account of my character creation choices.

 

[aris]

Something happened in the 90s that caused everything made in Japan to turn to shit

What happened was closed border policy, isolationism that turns into cultural degeneracy.

Spoiler

problem?

 

[Cryomancer]

Ah, yes, the Trenchcoat of Inconspicuousness.

Depends if we are talking about real life or not, because a vampire on VtM can just domiante the policeman to ignore the obvious weapon also, using a lot of clothing in Orlando and in Alaska can draw completely different types of attentions.

Yes, spears are very practical weapons and don't get nearly enough love,

You are right. I an not saying that swords are completely useless BUT armor and spears needs some love.

except for the parts that treat you as Charname, Gorion's Ward, the Bhaalspawn. In the grand scheme of things, the impact of character class in pretty small, because it's a party-based RPG about doing D&D things (...) it would still be basically the same game, and whether it is boring or not is a function of whether the things you do in Baldur's Gate are boring or not.

On Arcanum, dialog is much better than BG2. You can even talk with deceased people if you have learned a necromancy spell and solve quests in a different way.

But why my character needs to be the center of the world? OR the savior of the world? Why he can't be just another character of that world? You are not the unique Bhaalspawn on BG2. VtMB is amazing because even if you are supernatural. You still only a small part of a big world. You can't prevent Gehema, you can't become on top of Tremere pyramid and the endings is quite interesting. Even when you are a circle 9 wizard capable of casting devastating spells like stop time and wish, you are still a piece of the world. Other bhaalspawn are equally powerful.

Even on Icewind dale, you are not trying to save the world. You are dealing with a local problem; Icewind dale is a region where people live in tribes and small cities and the villain wanna a unification of that region. Fallout 1 has you dealing with the problems of your vault. Fallout New Vegas, has you dealing with the problems of a local desert. If the Courier dies, the things on the desert will continue moving forward. Differently but is not as if everyone will gonna die.

About Geneforge, Geneforge has class selection(shaper/guardian/agent)

And some games despite giving a lot of class options assume that the PC belongs to a class. NWN2 is a example of this. And the ludicrous butchering that they did to arcane classes is not the reason. Is because for eg, during a Trial on chapter 2. A cleric of Tyr or a LG Paladin would lose the power if he is guilty and could easily prove his innocence. A sorcerer could solve the trial by "N" possible ways too.

 

[Gangrelrumbler]

But why my character needs to be the center of the world? OR the savior of the world? Why he can't be just another character of that world? You are not the unique Bhaalspawn on BG2. VtMB is amazing because even if you are supernatural. You still only a small part of a big world. You can't prevent Gehema, you can't become on top of Tremere pyramid and the endings is quite interesting. Even when you are a circle 9 wizard capable of casting devastating spells like stop time and wish, you are still a piece of the world. Other bhaalspawn are equally powerful.

By the end of TOB you are one of the most powerful people in the setting overshadowing even Elminster, end if you chose so you can become a God. Other Bhaalspawn being equally powerful because there are people equally powerful to the hero in every JRPG game, they are called bosses.

 

[zwanzig_zwoelf]

But why my character needs to be the center of the world? OR the savior of the world? Why he can't be just another character of that world?

Because it sells, duh. Being the savior of the world or the center of the world is a cheap way to make basement dwellers feel good and open their wallets.

Being another brick in the wall is harder to design and market in an appealing way, not to mention it's even harder to convince people who are enjoying Save the World LXXVI and crave more of the same to try something different.

Pretty sure the argument against this will be the same: 'When I'm done working 30 hours a day 8 days a week and done feeding my 11 wives and 74 sons, I want these stupid videogames to provide a 300 hours long fellatio with an ebin background and make me feel great'.