A: Dragon and Computer Gaming World were the leading American game magazines dedicated to computer RPGs during the early-mid-1990s. They demonstrate how American computer RPG fans perceived rival Japanese console RPGs during the early-mid-1990s, and the predominant perception at the time among American computer RPG fans was that Japanese console RPGs were arcade-style action RPGs. It's not until FFVII that the stereotypes of Japanese console RPGs changed. You can deny it as much as you want, but you do not have any sources earlier than FFVII to confirm whatever stereotypes it is that you have about "JRPGs", but the only sources we have prior to that stereotype Japanese console RPGs in a very different manner, as action RPGs rather than FF-style RPGs.
B: Okay.
C: I said Gateway to Asphai and ICON are action-adventures, because they lack proper experience leveling systems, but just level-up automatically when you clear a dungeon floor, much like Zelda, making them action-adventures rather than action RPGs. In comparison, Dragon Slayer and Hydlide have all the RPG statistics leveling-up as you defeat enemies, making them true action RPGs. D&D Intellivision is also an action-adventure, not an action RPG. Telengard is a turn-based Roguelike, where the enemies don't move or attack unless you move or attack. If the enemies have to wait for you to make a move, that makes it a turn-based RPG. In comparison, the enemies in Dragon Slayer and Hydlide independently charge towards you regardless of whether or not you move, and they will keep harming you unless you keep charging and bumping into them, like in the early Ys games. In Freitag and Zoarre, you just wait for an enemy to charge you and see who wins, never forcing you to attack the enemy yourself, making it just a random battle rather than action combat. I have no idea what you mean by "Super Q", since nothing comes up when searching that term. Excluding these, we have the following action RPGs:
(inserts junk)
Total 1983-1990
East: 100 games
West: 30 games
Conclusion: Japan was producing the overwhelming majority of action RPGs during this time period.
D: The Souls games' combat systems have far more in common with modern Japanese action RPGs like Monster Hunter and Dragon's Dogma than they do with modern Western action RPGs like Skyrim or Dragon Age. The reason why the Souls games stand out are because their combat systems play differently from WRPGs like Skyrim and Dragon Age. The Souls games represent a fusion between Japanese and Western elements, so it's ridiculous to refer to them as just "WRPG". As for Mass Effect, I wasn't just referring to the TPS combat system, but also the fact that its dialogue choices and branching storylines are very similar to Japanese visual novel games, which have been doing them for much longer and still go much deeper with them. In addition, Mass Effect also borrowed ideas from Final Fantasy and particularly Star Ocean. The influence goes both ways, so stop trying to disingenuously present it as a one-way street.
E: Have you already forgotten about what I said about Tri-Ace? I already stated above: "And Tales of Symphonia wasn't the only exception either. Nintendo's Pokemon was a huge phenomenon that transcended the video game industry, just as Square's Final Fantasy and Kingdom Hearts did. In addition, Sony's Legend of Dragoon sold almost a million in the US, Mario role-playing games sold milions, Camelot's Golden Sun sold over 742,000 units in the US, Tri-Ace's Star Ocean 3 sold over 630,000 units in the US, etc." These numbers are clearly higher than the US sales figures for non-Square Japanese RPGs today. If your argument is that Squaresoft was the leading Japanese RPG developer at the time, then I never disagreed with that. What I was disagreeing with is your earlier suggestion that Squaresoft was the only mainstream successful Japanese RPG developer in the US at the time. And now it seems you've acknowledged that Squaresoft wasn't the only one.
A. You can't use stray articles by certain people as a voice for everyone there and all other media which clearly,a s proven, already had an idea of JRPG ins the first place, as proved above. Clearly sterotypes also existed before FF& given the information presented to you. Why would they say usual for Jrpgs if it was only when FF7 did it? The actual reasons were applied TO FF7 so it's very very stupid and desperate to say only after FF7 when there is strict evidence contradicting your claim. Agaion IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING that counters this then put it down otherwise you lsot, stop trying to backpedal, paraphrase, and run around the issue. Evidence is RIGHT THERE.
C. One thing is that no one considered gateway to Aspahi an Action Adventure but you. It's also clear you've never played the game. The rest of your list is literally games that are Arog. You keep changing the definition of Action Rpg so you can continue to add more games, please realize at this point you have now officially crossed the gauntlet barrier and your definition now extends to gauntlet right?
Another thing you did which shows you lost the argument, is now your list is literally filled with games not only that are not Arpgs at all and you clearly didn't look them up (but seemingly you looked up SOME of my games, as excepted from your usual arguing pattern) you also have a wide range of PORTS that aren't new games (Super Hydlide really?), which again, both areas would expand almost each year for the West to 20 games. Might want to try to make your lists again? How about we actually use what are considered action rpgs?
D. They don't at all, especially earlier monster hunters that now somehow don't exist. You're Mass Effect branching choices are nothing like Japanese visual novel games and are nonsense (not to mention the originators of that predate VN games, who have no gameplay to go along with them (VN), but you no basically nothing about gaming so this isn't surprising, you use Wikipedia as your fact finder.) and yes, I agree Souls has elements of both, issue you won't get through your head is it leans more west, which is why people put it under Wrpg, it's clearly influenced more by the west by a good margin. Which is why it's under that label often. Personally i think souls is garbage.
E. No have you forgotten my words or are you to busy reconstructing them? Oh and I guess you didn't even READ my response in E. last post because if you looked at my sentences before and after that list of PSX games, you're response would be completely different. You literally ignored that whole part, you're very bad at this.
I mean "flops, Slight niches, and exceptions" seems to vanish when you want it to. Also another thing you ignore is your own post of "hugely successful" that you seem to forget you said. Until you actually READ and look at the formatting in E. then it's clear you are posting without reading, which does nothing for you. (It's clear you didn't read because you started talking about the PS2 when that wasn't the point of the statement you were responding to, yet.)
I will say however in the PS2 era the gap is bigger than the era listed in E. last post. (In which case as ne of the exception Star Ocean 3, if true, would be underlined.)
No but seriously, you desperation in that list is akward, first you streteched the definition included, non-Arpgs, a re-releases/compilations, along with games with the wrong dates, among other issues. Then you list a LOT of ports/rereleases, games that aren't Arpgs, Games that play like Freitag when you say Freitag doesn't count, games that are past the border line and fall under games like gautnlet, and etc. Have you tried honesty?
Ahh great now i got to manually look at the games on your list and fi that as well yikes, this would be so much easier if you were actually not trying to have an agenda.
Edit: BTW, although I don't 100% agree with this guy, he brings up some good points that work better with words than text:
Pt2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8aiEsIW9IM
Pt3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cmkdoz5LjdE
Log in to comment