Xbox versus PS2 for the discerning adult

[trancejeremy]

Many console RPGs have some sort of multiple endings. In fact, I think Chrono Trigger pretty much pioneered the multiple ending/non-linear RPG, though it wasn't the first to do so.

Some people play RPGs for the story and characterization, some play it for the rampant munchinkinism (Woohoo, I'm level 2000!), some enjoy the combat (be it tactical or action). There's no right answer.

Personally, I like Morrowind, but don't think it's much of an RPG since there are basically no distinct characters that you can interact with meaningfully or anything resembling a plot. It's more like Elite, but in a fantasy world. You go whereever want, kill stuff, take their stuff, explore, sight see. Fun but very empty and cold.

I was looking forward to Jade Empire, until I learned it would have a whole lot of action elements, like a fighting game. No thanks.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

I'm gonna have to agree with Dragonblade. I haven't enjoyed any recent Japanese console RPGs because it feels like I'm watching a movie occasionally interrupted by interactive combat sequences.

Do you watch movies?

If so, why not watch 40-hour movies with interactive combat sequences, rather than 3-hour movies without them?

Note also that I reccomended the Playstation 2 precisely because it, unlike the XBox, is backwards compatible. You can play Chrono Trigger, Final Fantasy 6, Lunar Eternal Blue, Wild ARMs 2, Suikoden or Xenogears, as well as Final Fantasy X, Shadow Hearts and Star Ocean 3. The older console RPGs are, IMO, better games (and better stories, by and large) - hardly "recent."

Plus, I'm getting a little burned out on how almost every Final Fantasy game inevitably seems to involve a group of angst-ridden, beautiful teenagers saving the world. It's like I'm watching Dawson's Creek with swords.

Point. Sort of.

To cite the most recent installment Wakka, Kimahri, Lulu and certainly Auron were all 20 or older, and neither Rikku nor Yuna were terribly angsty.

Nonetheless, I prefer several other series (such as Shadow Hearts, Wild ARMs and pre-4 Suikoden) to Final Fantasy; but Final Fantasy defines the type for people who've never played this kind of game.

Baldur's Gate 2, Planescape: Torment, and Knights of the Old Republic, on the other hand, are some of my favorite RPGs of all times. Those games had great storylines, addictive gameplay, memorable characters, and allowed you to have at least some influence over the storyline.

-shrug-

If I want to influence a story, I'll play pen-n-paper. People on ENWorld generally have access to some type of RPG experience. If I want a story of novel-like depth and complexity that doesn't sacrifice interesting plot twists to player influence, I'll pop in a console RPG.

But if you found Baldur's Gate and Torment's gameplay "addicting"...

Sorry, man, but I'm just not into S&M

 

[Dragonblade]

I'd rather watch a Japanese RPG than play the soulless, storyless tripe that comes out for the PC. Especially since the gameplay in most PC-style RPGs (KotR is something of an exception, I'll admit) has gone so far downhill in the last five years that they're barely playable.

Not every American RPG is good. But the best American RPGs are better, IMO than the best Japanese RPGs.

If I want a decent American game, I know where to find it. Warcraft, Doom, Half-Life, Unreal... I love American action and real-time strategy games. But modern American "RPGs" are little more than poorly-concieved real-time strategy games with stories vastly inferior to anything Blizzard has done (aside from its only sort-of RPG, Diablo) and stats.

Japanese and Japanese-style RPGs set out to tell a story; there's a game involved, but in many cases it's secondary to the world, the tale and especially the characters. If you want mindless hack and slash, or to uberize your character with race/class/stat-up combos, then none of that is important.

Gameplay still should be.

Story? Their story, with their characters, their plot, and other than giving you the ability push the button for attack, or the button for spell, there is virtually no "game" involved. To me an RPG is about making my own choices, creating my own character, and doing what I want. Not what some frustrated Japanese movie maker masquerading as a game designer wants.

I wouldn't consider FF Tactics, Tactics Ogre, Front Mission, etc. RPGs in any sense of the word. They are pure strategy games. And I thought most of them were pretty boring.

I don't have monstrous twitch reflexes. I don't enjoy third-rate RTSes (Baldur's Gate) masquerading as RPGs. I usually don't enjoy second-rate action-adventure games (Knights of the Old Republic, console versions of Baldur's Gate) doing same.

The console versions of Baldur's Gate are not RPGs. They are action games with character building elements.

Basically the fundamental difference between the current generation of American RPGs and Japanese RPGs is the fact that an American RPG lets me customize my character, not only in terms of stats, race, class, etc. But also gives me freedom to move through the storyline in the manner that I desire. You have no such control or freedom with 99% of Japanese RPGs. All those beautiful CG cinema scenes mean nothing to me because I don't care about the characters in most cases. And the reason is because I don't get to take those characters and make them mine. I just have to sit back and watch them make poor decisions, or be totally railroaded down lame plots that would have been far more interesting were I given an actual decision in how they unfolded.

 

[Dragonblade]

I lived in Japan and owned a Japanese PS2. I played that thing to death. And before that, when I was a college student, I lived with a host family in Tokyo and played through Final Fantasy 8, Front Mission, and so on with my Japanese host brother.

I'm not totally bagging on Japanese games. A lot of decent games still come from Japan. But I've realized over time that 99% of them are all the same. Some good, some mediocre, some bad. None of them ever completely sucked, and none of them ever blew me away. Eventually I got tired of them.

Now when I play American games (especially RPGs) I experience the full gamut of utter dreck to beyond awesome. Now, granted no one wants to play a game that sucks. But I do want to play games that totally blow me away. And in my experience, only American games reach those lofty heights (granted they are few, but they are there). So while FF X may be a gorgeously animated game, it was far too limiting for my tastes, whereas Morrowind just totally blew me away through the sheer freedom and options I had.

Again, thats just my opinion.

 

[Dark Jezter]

Do you watch movies?

If so, why not watch 40-hour movies with interactive combat sequences, rather than 3-hour movies without them?

Because I buy a gaming system to play games on, not (as Dragonblade put it) sit through the latest creation of a wannabe movie director posing as a game designer.

-shrug-

If I want to influence a story, I'll play pen-n-paper. People on ENWorld generally have access to some type of RPG experience. If I want a story of novel-like depth and complexity that doesn't sacrifice interesting plot twists to player influence, I'll pop in a console RPG.

But if you found Baldur's Gate and Torment's gameplay "addicting"...

Sorry, man, but I'm just not into S&M

Funny. The way you feel about the gameplay in the Infinity Engine games is exactly how I feel about the gameplay in most console RPGs.

Most recent console RPGs that I've played have very little in the way of gameplay. The "combat" usually involves selecting "attack" or "cast spell" from a menu, waiting for the enemies to attack you back, lather, rinse, repeat until enemies are all dead and the game moves on to the next set of long dialogue sequences and CGI cutscenes (although there might be repetitive mini-games involving chocobos or collectable cards that you can do to get access to better weapons).

I've played through Baldur's Gate 2 (with expansion pack) over five times trying out different character builds, choosing different NPCs to party with, doing different subquests, and taking different paths through the storyline. When I played Baldur's Gate II, I actually felt like I was a participant rather than a spectator.

And having control over the story dosen't make it less good, either: IMO, Baldur's Gate II and Planescape: Torment both had better storylines and characters than any Japanese console RPGs I've ever played.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

Story? Their story, with their characters, their plot, and other than giving you the ability push the button for attack, or the button for spell, there is virtually no "game" involved. To me an RPG is about making my own choices, creating my own character, and doing what I want. Not what some frustrated Japanese movie maker masquerading as a game designer wants.

To me, what the game is called is immaterial. Whether it's a "game" or not is immaterial. That it's often a darn good story with a beautifully rendered setting that's more compelling than 99% of the Tolkien-ripoff fantasy novels on the market? That matters.

Japanese game designers apparently don't see themselves differently from movie makers. They apparently don't feel their medium is inherently inferior to film as a medium for storytelling.

I happen to agree with them.

I wouldn't consider FF Tactics, Tactics Ogre, Front Mission, etc. RPGs in any sense of the word. They are pure strategy games. And I thought most of them were pretty boring.

I don't care if they're "RPGs" in any sense of the word. They're fine games with great stories.

If you found them boring, well...

Perhaps it's no coincidence that you haven't listed a single strategy-oriented, turn-based game in the roster of those that you've really liked.

So while FF X may be a gorgeously animated game, it was far too limiting for my tastes, whereas Morrowind just totally blew me away through the sheer freedom and options I had.

If I want to swing on a chandelier, pulling it down at the end of the swing so it falls on my enemies while I slide free and yank out a rapier to impale a major boss, will Morrowind let me?

How about if I want to construct an airship out of the shattered hull of a sailing vessel and the stomach lining of a great wyrm dragon?

Didn't think so.

I can do those things in d20 or any other tabletop RPG. THAT'S sheer freedom and options. Options that mean a lot more than branching dialogue trees, options that are limited only by my imagination and my GM's, options that, since they can be created on the fly, can weave an interesting saga around my customized character.

Modern PC RPGs give me stories neutered to provide meaningless customization within preset options.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

Because I buy a gaming system to play games on, not (as Dragonblade put it) sit through the latest creation of a wannabe movie director posing as a game designer.

-shrug-

I buy them for entertainment, whatever form that might take.

Funny. The way you feel about the gameplay in the Infinity Engine games is exactly how I feel about the gameplay in most console RPGs.

Most recent console RPGs that I've played have very little in the way of gameplay. The "combat" usually involves selecting "attack" or "cast spell" from a menu, waiting for the enemies to attack you back, lather, rinse, repeat until enemies are all dead and the game moves on to the next set of long dialogue sequences and CGI cutscenes (although there might be repetitive mini-games involving chocobos or collectable cards that you can do to get access to better weapons).

Again with the recent (though I'd disagree).

I'd love to see someone get through Wild ARMs 2 with just the Attack and Magic commands. I could say the same about Wild ARMs 3, for all its myriad problems. How about Legend of Legaia 2 - no "attack" command to press, and a very deep combo system to explore.

To say nothing of the superb gamut of Tactics RPGs which provide a kind of gameplay no American game has since Civ III at the latest.

I've played through Baldur's Gate 2 (with expansion pack) over five times trying out different character builds, choosing different NPCs to party with, doing different subquests, and taking different paths through the storyline. When I played Baldur's Gate II, I actually felt like I was a participant rather than a spectator.

I envy the fortitude to suffer through the boring twitchy battle system even once.

Again, I guess you just never watch movies. I don't watch all that many myself, but I've seen quite a few that I enjoyed being a spectator to. Having a simple, fun battle system attached, or better yet a deep and engrossing system with real tactics, is a big plus.

And having control over the story dosen't make it less good, either: IMO, Baldur's Gate II and Planescape: Torment both had better storylines and characters than any Japanese console RPGs I've ever played.

Planescape: Torment I can understand, although I certainly disagree - the depth of Xenogears or the verisimilitude of Vandal Hearts 2 make it look like a merely average DM's gaming session.

Baldur's Gate, though?

I'll admit, I couldn't bring myself to finish either installment of that series; perhaps it picked up - a lot - later.

 

[Dark Jezter]

Again with the recent (though I'd disagree).

I'd love to see someone get through Wild ARMs 2 with just the Attack and Magic commands. I could say the same about Wild ARMs 3, for all its myriad problems. How about Legend of Legaia 2 - no "attack" command to press, and a very deep combo system to explore.

To say nothing of the superb gamut of Tactics RPGs which provide a kind of gameplay no American game has since Civ III at the latest.

These "tactics RPGs" you are mentioning (FF Tactics, Tactics Ogre, Front Mission, etc) are strategy games with perhaps a few light RPG elements thrown in for flavor. If you can call them RPGs, then I can call Super Mario Brothers a first-person shooter.

I envy the fortitude to suffer through the boring twitchy battle system even once.

Just out of curiosity, what makes BG2's combat "twitchy?" Is it the fact that it's pausable real-time rather than turn-based?

For that matter, why is turn-based automatically assumed to be good while real-time is automatically assumed to be bad?

Again, I guess you just never watch movies. I don't watch all that many myself, but I've seen quite a few that I enjoyed being a spectator to.

Yes, I watch movies. I enjoy watching movies. I don't like my games to be movies, which also explains why I didn't like Metal Gear Solid 2 (which seemed to have endless CG cutscenes for every few minutes of gameplay).

Having a simple, fun battle system attached, or better yet a deep and engrossing system with real tactics, is a big plus.

Which is why I liked BG2 and PS:T's combat systems. They managed to nicely fit the AD&D ruleset into a real-time combat system.

Planescape: Torment I can understand, although I certainly disagree - the depth of Xenogears or the verisimilitude of Vandal Hearts 2 make it look like a merely average DM's gaming session.

Baldur's Gate, though?

I'll admit, I couldn't bring myself to finish either installment of that series; perhaps it picked up - a lot - later.

You may feel that the BG games are completely without merit, which is your right, but even I can admit that Final Fantasy X had good graphics, animation, music, and storyline (even though it was sorely lacking in gameplay and interactivity). Still, the Baldur's Gate franchise must have at least something going for it, considering how many copies it sold and how many "RPG of the Year" and "Game of the Year" awards it won.

 

[Desdichado]

On a slightly different tack; this article may be of interest. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6199779/site/newsweek/

Oh, and MoogleEmpOg, keep in mind, the original poster said he was a middle-aged fantasy enthusiast from Norman, OK. I think you're a bit off-base by recommending a slew of Japanese titles and denigrating stuff like Baldur's Gate.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

Oh, and MoogleEmpOg, keep in mind, the original poster said he was a middle-aged fantasy enthusiast from Norman, OK. I think you're a bit off-base by recommending a slew of Japanese titles and denigrating stuff like Baldur's Gate.

Why?

I know several middle-aged fantasy enthusiasts living in the midwestern (well, western) United States who play Final Fantasy religiously; at least one of them won't touch Baldur's Gate with a 10-ft. pole (although an 11-ft. pole might work).

Perhaps the aversion to Bioware is a bloodline issue, though - the only one I know for a fact doesn't like BG is a relative.

These "tactics RPGs" you are mentioning (FF Tactics, Tactics Ogre, Front Mission, etc) are strategy games with perhaps a few light RPG elements thrown in for flavor. If you can call them RPGs, then I can call Super Mario Brothers a first-person shooter.

Fair enough.

I'll just call them "good games, most of which are set in a fantasy world."

The original poster said he was a fantasy enthusiast, not specifically that he was looking for RPGs. For all we know, he'd actually prefer a fantasy-based real-time strategy game like Warcraft and we're all wildly off-base.

Although Mario lacks even "a few light RPG elements."

Just out of curiosity, what makes BG2's combat "twitchy?" Is it the fact that it's pausable real-time rather than turn-based?

For that matter, why is turn-based automatically assumed to be good while real-time is automatically assumed to be bad?

Yes, it's because it's pausable real-time.

What makes real-time bad?

The fact that I don't like it.

I have no idea if the OP likes it or not, but from my perspective, it has absolutely stagnated two entire genres of PC games (strategy and role-playing) that used to be my favorites. Since most posters on ENWorld play some type of pen-n-paper RPGs (generally turn based, them buggers), I think it's a better than 50% chance that the OP is at least more comfortable with turn-based battle systems.

Yes, I watch movies. I enjoy watching movies. I don't like my games to be movies, which also explains why I didn't like Metal Gear Solid 2 (which seemed to have endless CG cutscenes for every few minutes of gameplay).

-shrug-

Why do you arbitrarily assign designations like that?

Saying you don't like Metal Gear Solid because the story it tells is off-the-wall if not downright silly is fine. But why shouldn't a quote-unquote "game" be just as valid a vehicle for telling you that poor story?

Which is why I liked BG2 and PS:T's combat systems. They managed to nicely fit the AD&D ruleset into a real-time combat system.

Fair enough. We differ mostly on the "nicely."

Although...

AD&D. Fun and simple.

You may feel that the BG games are completely without merit, which is your right, but even I can admit that Final Fantasy X had good graphics, animation, music, and storyline (even though it was sorely lacking in gameplay and interactivity). Still, the Baldur's Gate franchise must have at least something going for it, considering how many copies it sold and how many "RPG of the Year" and "Game of the Year" awards it won.

Baldur's Gate did have something going for it.

Minsc and Boo.

I mean, duh.

Seriously, though - I hated Baldur's Gate and it's brood. I enjoyed almost nothing about the games. The graphics hurt my eyes, the gameplay annoyed me to no end, the lack of a strong driving storyline drove me to distraction, and wading through the massive dialogue trees with every stinking random passerby bored me to tears. I enjoyed the voice acting and (what little there was of) the characterization, but that was it. The fact that it became extremely popular mystifies me to no end.

I've bought and tried to play BG 1&2 and Icewind Dale 1&2, loathed three of them, and found BG2 at best tolerable. Planescape: Torment was the only entry in the series I enjoyed, probably because its unusual setting and tighter focus allowed it to explore the characters in more depth.

I recall reading an interview with somebody (maybe Monte Cook?) where he described the experience of playing Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil on his PC as being like playing the module in real life - with a very poor DM. Whoever it was, actually meant it as praise, but praise with a caveat.

That's how I feel about all the Baldur's Gate and later PC RPGs - they're like really poor sessions of D&D, without the social interaction.

Console RPGs offer (me) a completely different experience from pen-n-paper RPGs; PC RPGs (and the XBox ports thereof) offer (me) an experience that is like pen-n-paper, but not as good.