But the #1 reason that CRPGs aren't dying...

[Yst]

It seems to me one might just as easily argue that party banter and complex NPC dialogue came to CRPGs by way of the Adventure genre and its offshoots and hybrid incarnations, as by way of JRPGs. Actually, the prior strikes me as the more credible claim, since Adventure genre design concepts informed so much else in the development of story-focused and character-driven western RPGs.

 

Realistically though, I think it's silly to draw a direct causal link to any one source. We can give credit to those who did it first (If I had to guess, I'd say the first arbitrarily in-party character dialogue interaction was probably that of various Infocom text adventures), and that's all well and good, but attributing all subsequent precedent in party banter and NPC interaction to whatever first precedents are to be unearthed is just silly. Having characters talk to each other in a character and story driven RPG is just common sense. Maybe CRPGs which employed in-depth character interaction early on applied principles they'd seen in JRPGs or Adventures, but on the other hand, maybe they were just applying principles completely generic to every single PnP roleplaying game since the beginning of time. It doesn't take much creativity to stumble upon this particular notion. Merely to apply it.

[Lancer]

I have a feeling it would have happened regardless of whether or not JRPGs even existed.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Well... It just seems too coincidental to me that the obvious JRPG inspiration in the "cinematic movie cutscences" and pre-generated characters, and in the case of KOTOR, "mini-games" for me to believe that the whole movement wasn't JRPG-inspired.

 

No to mention that this is something cRPG players have been complaining about for years in regards to the "lack of party interaction" as compared to their JRPG counterparts.

 

It is even stated in Torment's credits that the game was inspired by the FF series. And then after that we had games like BGII and Arcanum and later on KOTOR trying to emphasize party interaction more.

[Lancer]

When you guys use the term CRPGs, are you referring to Console-RPGs or Computer-RPGs?

 

I've seen the term used both ways.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

This is true.. I might be mistaken but in general I have noticed on this forum that cRPG (with the lowercase c) refers to computer RPGS. CRPGS (with the uppercase) refers to JRPGS.

 

But I do agree with your usage of "western" and "console" RPGS to avoid confusion more.

[alanschu]

I'd be much more willing to attribute the mini-games to JRPG than character interaction. I also think that cinematic movie cutscenes would be a stretch, but who knows.

 

And as for PS:T being inspired by FF7, I had heard that the inspiration that FF7 gave for the game was for spell effects.

 

My original concern was still the point regarding RPGs becoming merely "JRPGs"

 

This for one thing places a negative connotation towards the term "JRPG" even if you had no idea what it stood for. It was also a slippery slope term, and was most definitely not used in a positive way.

 

 

You also completely underestimate the market. Someone else mentioned this, but as long as there are some people interested in playing "CRPGs" then there will be some developer that will make it. It'd be stupid not to. No business is going to completely ignore a sect of the market, especially if there's virtually no competition for it. It's why you still have adventure games coming out despite Adventure gaming being dead for years.

 

On a final note, I don't consider CRPGs to be hitting the same stage of Adventure gaming.

[EnderAndrew]

That is why I use those terms!

[alanschu]

Meh, when used with JRPG, I think CRPG is clear enough, seeing as JRPGs are almost a synonym for console RPGs.

[Lancer]

It seems to me one might just as easily argue that party banter and complex NPC dialogue came to CRPGs by way of the Adventure genre and its offshoots and hybrid incarnations, as by way of JRPGs.  Actually, the prior strikes me as the more credible claim, since Adventure genre design concepts informed so much else in the development of story-focused and character-driven western RPGs.

 

Realistically though, I think it's silly to draw a direct causal link to any one source.  We can give credit to those who did it first (If I had to guess, I'd say the first arbitrarily in-party character dialogue interaction was probably that of various Infocom text adventures), and that's all well and good, but attributing all subsequent precedent in party banter and NPC interaction to whatever first precedents are to be unearthed is just silly.  Having characters talk to each other in a character and story driven RPG is just common sense.  Maybe CRPGs which employed in-depth character interaction early on applied principles they'd seen in JRPGs or Adventures, but on the other hand, maybe they were just applying principles completely generic to every single PnP roleplaying game since the beginning of time.  It doesn't take much creativity to stumble upon this particular notion.  Merely to apply it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I agree (to some extent) but if this is so "common sense" knowledge why did it take so damned long to be applied to western RPGS?

 

And there is a big difference between downright copying an already established precedent and being *inspired* by it. Sure there were other outside pressures to incorporate the said party interaction principles mainly in the form of people's PnP campaigns, but to deny the obvious importance of JRPGS as well in the movement is just being in denial.

 

Think of it like this:

You don't *have* to have obvious JRPG touches like cinematic movie cutscenes, pre-generated characters and (in the case of KOTOR) mini-games to have detailed party interaction.

If JRPGS hadn't inspired the push for western RPG party interaction at all you would have detailed party interaction,yes, but you would expect it to be without any of the above JRPG elements. It seems too convenient and coincidental for me to believe that you could stumble upon those specific ideas without it being inspired by the eastern world.

[EnderAndrew]

Ultima VI and VII were the first western RPGs where I felt this party camraderie.

[alanschu]

Me too.

[Lancer]

Ultima VI and VII were the first western RPGs where I felt this party camraderie.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yep.. particularly in Serpent Isle, however, this was not attempted again until Torment (from my understanding).. And it is a mystery to me as why.

[alanschu]

What western RPGs came out between Torment and Serpent Isle?

[EnderAndrew]

When did Fallout come out?

[Lancer]

When did Fallout come out?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

1997

[Lancer]

What western RPGs came out between Torment and Serpent Isle?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Actually not too many memorable ones aside from Daggerfall, Fallout, Eye of the Beholder III and then a whole bunch of hack and slash games.

 

This period actually corresponds to the "dark ages" of western RPGs.

[Lancer]

The Fallout series is actually a great example of where you can have more detailed party interaction without obvious JRPG elements (in response to some of Yts' ideas).

 

Now contrast that with Torment, KOTOR, and even BGII.

 

 

After Serpent Isle the first RPG to introduce JRPG-style party interaction elements was Torment.

[alanschu]

But by your own admission there was a stunning lack of western style RPG games.

 

And most of them seemed to be the soloist type of game, rather than having a party (or at least they had parties created by the player, which are more limited in their interactions as well).

 

I would think that if there was more definite influence from japanese RPGs...then it would have occurred sooner in western RPGs.

[Lancer]

And as for PS:T being inspired by FF7, I had heard that the inspiration that FF7 gave for the game was for spell effects.

 

JRPGS are known for their emphasis on good NPC dialogue filled with the full gamut of emotions. Torment was more similar in that regard unlike say, Fallout for instance.

[Lancer]

I would think that if there was more definite influence from japanese RPGs...then it would have occurred sooner in western RPGs.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

But it did. It was already occuring in Ultima VI and Ultima VII both parts. Then there was that lapse of time (for whatever inexplicable reason) until Torment.

[alanschu]

And as for PS:T being inspired by FF7, I had heard that the inspiration that FF7 gave for the game was for spell effects.

 

JRPGS are known for their emphasis on good NPC dialogue filled with the full gamut of emotions. Torment was more similar in that regard unlike say, Fallout for instance.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

I would think that any good NPC dialogue would have to involve emotion though.

 

I would liken PS:T's style to be more of a design decision rather than an inspiration from japanese RPGs. The game's focus was explicitly on a strong narrative....which I would say you'd be investing too much faith into JRPGs if you feel that it's narrative was inspired by JRPGs.

 

Party interaction was inevitable....and saying that the emotion or whatever is because of JRPGs is silly, as you could just as easily attribute the inspiration to standard literature or movies.

[alanschu]

I would think that if there was more definite influence from japanese RPGs...then it would have occurred sooner in western RPGs.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

But it did. It was already occuring in Ultima VI and Ultima VII both parts. Then there was that lapse of time (for whatever inexplicable reason) until Torment.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Yes, Richard Garriot definitely would not think that having cool NPCs to join your party and to interact without the influence of JRPGs.

 

Characters such as Iolo, Dupre, and Shamino were present in much, much earlier games. They just evolved into party members.

[EnderAndrew]

FFVII innovated with graphics. That is what wowed us and got us to buy it initally. The story was something discovered post-purchase.

 

If you want to talk about party interaction and story, Squaresoft was really doing that from FF IV on. Maybe they did really pioneer that.

[alanschu]

I still don't see western RPGs becoming fully assimilated into linear games like FF7 as Lancer seemed to think.

[Lancer]

I would think that any good NPC dialogue would have to involve emotion though.

 

But it doesn't matter what you or I think a good RPG should have.. The fact still stands that JRPGS beat western RPGs to the punch (and by many years) in regards to narrative. The question to ask is why it took so long for western RPGs to adapt and what were the pressures behind the change?

 

I would liken PS:T's style to be more of a design decision rather than an inspiration from japanese RPGs.  The game's focus was explicitly on a strong narrative....which I would say you'd be investing too much faith into JRPGs if you feel that it's narrative was inspired by JRPGs.

 

I would say that both reasons were a factor.

 

Party interaction was inevitable....and saying that the emotion or whatever is because of JRPGs is silly, as you could just as easily attribute the inspiration to standard literature or movies.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Why wasn't there party interaction from the get-go then? -- Whereas in JRPGS this was done almost from day one.

 

And I did mention that inspiration came from various sources with JRPGS being just one of them. Regardless of what you think about the other points, still you recognize at least that "mini-games" in western RPGS were inspired by JRPGs. And that Torment's spell-effects are likewise also JRPG-inspired.

So it is a fact then that western RPGS *are* being inspired by JRPGS though the disagreement lies at to what degree.

[alanschu]

Ok.......now I'm curious what the point is?

 

 

Couldn't you argue that the shift from goofy anime characters to a more lifelike style in JRPGs could be attributed to an inspiration from western RPGs?

 

 

I also disagree that they existed in JRPGs almost since day 1. At least for FF. I don't remember the original FF having any sort of party interactions whatsoever (or even a very good narrative).

[EnderAndrew]

I'm not saying FF1 did, since FF1 was four random characters you invented. FFIV was the first I now with very specific pre-created characters who interacted with each other and had a strong narrative.