Talk:Role-playing video game/Archive 2

message: This is a truly terrible article: its entire premise is based on original research, and fleshed out with lazy, sometimes offensive, generalisations. 
'Cultural differences' in RPGs exist only between the most extreme outlying examples that have diverged from traditional RPG design, e.g. Fallout and Final Fantasy 7. Mainstream RPGs produced in the west and east, such as Dragon Quest and Wizardry, are overwhelmingly similar, and in no way warrant the existance of this article, any more than Super Mario Bros. and Little Big Planet support the idea that there are significant 'cultural differences' in platformers.
82.132.139.111 (talk) 01:23, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Worst article on Wikipedia? 

message: The article doesn't reach a conclusion as to which genre of RPG is the superior and which is the inferior one; an omission that requires urgent and obvious correction. Can someone add a comment at the end giving an answer, otherwise the entire page somewhat lacks a point. You can't just talk about the differences without saying which one is the best. --122.29.10.235 (talk) 13:55, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Supremacy? 

message: I'm pretty sure most of the articles are based on original research and are more likely to make comparisons based on limited experience with so-called "Western" RPGs (and most these do not even include gamese developed in Europe). See Western Culture
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 161.38.223.219 (talk) 21:16, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Western?" 

message: I don't understand the last sentence in the "Comparisons" section. "[T]here are some Japanese RPGs ... and some Western RPGs" -- which what? It looks like the sentence is incomplete, and as I have not played either of the games listed, I couldn't guess what was left out. It doesn't look like the article went on to explain, but was later edited; no, the sentence just ends. Sobolewski 20:07, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Some of the context for the sentence was removed I think.  Originally, there was something right before it along the lines of "Most Japanese RPGs are for the console and most Western RPGs are for the computer", *but* there are in fact some important exceptions... etc.  I'll go fix it now.  -- Solberg 09:39, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Finish the Sentence 

message: I recently moved this section from the computer role-playing games page and added more information to it.  Tell me if you like or don't like the changes.  This was part of a large scale (successful I think) attempt to split CRPG and cRPG into two pages and create subpages to enable more expansion and elaboration of material in the future regarding the two subgenres.  -- Solberg 10:17, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  Especially with platforms like the Xbox and Xbox 360 bridging the gap between PCs and consoles, the cRPG/CRPG distinction is no longer as relevant as it used to be.  AFAIK, the Western/Japanese distinction is strong as ever, though.  Perhaps a page rename is in order. — Wisq (talk) 20:43, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Console RPG & Computer RPG split 

message: I don't see anything particularly inaccurate with this article, but it badly needs sources. Ace of Sevens 02:30, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sourcing 

message: *Ok, we can all agree on one thing: cRPG/CRPG has got to go. I'm going to start nixing it out of all CVG articles in favor of just CRPG with description and a link to clear up ambiguity. Example:
:Final Dragon Mystical Quest V is a console RPG (CRPG) for the Okama Gamesphere...
:And as long as the rest of the article refers to CRPG, it should be all good.  
*Given that there isn't a clear consensus(just like in the world outside of the wikipedia) on what to do about about the whole East Asian(Japanese)/Western vs Console/Computer RPG deal, I say we just handle it on a per article basis. We'll let the authors of the specific article emphasize the title based on whatever they think is appropriate. 
*For example, FF would perhaps best be described as Japanese RPG (JRPG) since it has spanned both PCs and consoles and comes from the mold of traditional style Japanese RPGs. Likewise, Baldur's Gate would perhas best be described as a Computer RPG (CRPG) since its only been on the PC platform. As long as we address the issues of East Asian(Japanese)/Western vs Console/Computer, on the articles Computer_role-playing_game & Console_role-playing_game it should be clear to anyone what type of game is being refered to.
*Finally, I've created redirects for JRPG & WRPG so if anyone wants to use those acronyms links for a article they will go to their appropriate locations.
--Mitaphane talk 11:46, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Plan of Action

message: From the article:
Fantasy/Sci-Fi hybrid settings (such as swords and sorcery elements coexisting with modern or futuristic technology) are rarely featured in Western RPGs. An exception is Arcanum: Of Steamworks and Magick Obscura, a steampunk style game.
The three major WRPG series - Ultima, Might & Magic, and Wizardry - all mixed fantasy and sci/fi at various times, M&M and Wizardry to an extreme extent in their later games. Other games such as Blue Byte's Albion were heavy sci-fi/magic mixed as well. The fact that the "big three" of PC RPGs were sci/fi fantasy seems to discredit any idea that Arcanum was some sort of exception. I'd suggest this paragraph be removed; it seems to be entirely original researched from somebody who hasn't really played the games being discussed on this page. (Which, honestly, is something that's going to pervade this entire section as a whole.) --220.253.126.249 11:09, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fantasy/sci-fi 

message: Is there really the cultural difference in western and eastern RPG?I would like to contribute the difference to the difference style of drawing in RPG games.--Ksyrie 03:52, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original reseach 

message: :Image:Fallout 01.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 08:00, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fair use rationale for Image:Fallout 01.jpg 

message: :Image:Fallout 01.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 05:03, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fair use rationale for Image:Fallout 01.jpg 

message: I didnt see a section (I mightve missed it) about the differences of the different audiences. As an editer of the Marl Kingdom series, I think it is notable that Japanese gamers are much more accepting of cute, colorful games, whereas western gamers tend to shun such games and view them as girly or too childish. Because of this, lots of games have had poor sales or have not even been localized.Evaunit666 05:25, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Japanese gamers vs western gamers 

message: I think a section on the cultural differences vis a vis MMORPGs is much needed. The differences are striking! SharkD 03:58, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  MMORPGs 

message: This article is horribly messed up!! It's describing Western RPGs as PC-based and Eastern RPG's as console based, whereas the article's own source only describes Western RPGs as literally made in the West (i.e. US) and Eastern as made in the East (i.e. Japan). Someone please put this stupid article out of its misery and nominate for delete, on grounds of OR.Scott 110 (talk) 05:56, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This topic can easily fall due to "subjectivity", as it is easy to become biased towards one side or the other.  As for OR, check the discussion on sourcing above. KyuuA4 (talk) 06:30, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Actually, I found the article very detailed, informative, and true. Western RPGs have their roots in PC, they only switched attention to consoles in the 21st century; Eastern RPGs are almost exclusively console-based. --217.172.29.4 (talk) 17:14, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  All wrong!! 

message: Does this type of topic (Eastern vs Western) apply to other video game genres? KyuuA4 (talk) 19:39, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not really, RPG is the only major genre where the difference is so evident. --217.172.29.4 (talk) 17:15, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Curiousity 

message: It can be agreed upon that this article is in desperate need of concrete sources and citations.  Now here is my question.  Can we cite individual video games for sources, like saying...
"Final Fantasy XII uses the license board system..." could we actually cite the video game as a source, since it is verifiable proof of what it contains?
If so, I should be able to go through in a day and make all the necessary citations.  If not, I'll scour google and such for articles about games which talk about what we need.  Fllmtlchcb (talk) 07:40, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The general consensus is that a video game itself can be cited as a primary source should you only be lifting off plot details about it.  Let's get citing, eh? Fllmtlchcb (talk) 18:01, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

text: You can't use a video game in that manner. That means you're evaluating evidence and giving it a position of prominence independent of a reliable third party source doing it first. It is a violation of WP:OR.--Crossmr (talk) 08:17, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Way late to the debate, but the issue's still relevant: Sure we can. Done properly, that you're making uncontroversial descriptive statements that are apparent from the works themselves. It is completely in line with primary sources as described in WP:OR. Forbidding the contents of works from being used in describing them would make our work unreasonably difficult for little gain in credibility. We cannot cite Romeo & Juliet to state that it has an underlying theme of misogynism, but we can cite Romeo & Juliet to state that Juliet dies, and I don't see how it is wrong to give what clearly happens a position of prominence without waiting for someone else. --Kizor 19:59, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citing Sources 

message: I notice in the Comparison Section there are a couple citations in the initial paragraph but that is it. Do the citations cover what is in the rest of the giant list of supposed prominent differences between the two genres? I noticed statements using words like "tend to" and other subjective opinionated language. If the citations don't cover those kinds of comparisons (and each one needs to be able to be found in the citations) we have a bit of an issue with WP:OR, WP:V and WP:OR.--Crossmr (talk) 06:06, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comparison Section 

message: The image :Image:FFXII License Board.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
The following images also have this problem:
*:      Image:RomancingSaGaSFBox.jpg
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --01:41, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image copyright problem with Image:FFXII License Board.png 

message: Might it be more accurate to describe -differences- in cut scenes, rather than to say they're more common in JRPGs?  I think I know the -type- of cut scene being referred to - but CRPGs have a ton of cut-scenes.  Perhaps they didn't back in the day, and nowadays they tend to be done in-engine rather than pre-rendered, as most JRPG ones, but saying they're more common in JRPGs doesn't seem quite accurate comparing present CRPGs to present JRPGs, in which both have a fair amount of scripted/cinematic content.  99.192.90.41 (talk) 19:26, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cut Scenes as a CRPG/JRPG difference 

message: This article currently focuses on the differences between the CRPG genre and the JRPG genre rather than the cultural differences in RPGs across all genres.  It does a fine job of this but it's title is misleading.  I believe that the state of the article is due to how western culture (specifically America) initially predominantly approached the RPG genre in video games and how eastern culture (specifically Japan) initially predominantly approached the RPG genre.  It also likely has much to do with the discussion about merging the two topics and why they need to stay seperate.  The issue with that is that it fails to address how the cultures approach ARPGs, MMORPGs, TRPGs (which in the west are commonly clumped together with [Turn-based tactics] games), and Rougelikes differently.  It also brings up the question about referring to JRPGs as Eastern RPGs when there is only a single non-Japanese game listed.  Korean game developers seem to predominantly make MMORPGs so clumping them together with Japanese developers seems off.  UncannyGarlic (talk) 22:48, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article is about the differences between CRPGs and JRPGs, not across all genres 

message: This article is far too long and focuses too much on specifics. The main difference between games developed in US than those of Japan(and whatever other countries one would associate with them) come from cultural differences between those territories and the creative process that drives the creation of these titles.
Also, it looks like this article is the product of some forum argument somewhere about which types of games are better (I.E. PC VS Console, East Versus West.) The easiest source or citation that leads me to believe this are the comments above this one. and the existence of the Computer Role playing game (CRPG) acronym.
I think this whole article needs to be deleted or rewritten to talk about the differences in development styles between these two territories.
Unfortunately I know nothing about this because I am not a game developer. Nor American Or Japanese.
So what I will do Is list the main differences I see in Fallout 2 and Final Fantasy XIII (If Fallout 2 is too old then I would cite The Elder Scrolls: Oblivion) I want to cite Dragon Age: Origins but I have not played it yet. 
In any Case here I go. 
Art Style: Fallout 2 has more of a realistic look whereas Final Fantasy XII has more a futuristic look. (Not to say that the world of Fallout is any more plausible than the world of Final Fantasy XII)  Futuristic is unfortunatly the only word I can think of describe the world of Final Fantasy XII, Characters in both games drive vehicles, use guns, walk on floors and both wear clothing that looks like its made from the same material. The simplest way to see this differences is to Google both games. 
Open End/ Linear : Fallout 2 allows one more freedom in their actions(In regards to choosing different ways to complete quests, fight battles, finish the story ect.) Whereas Final Fantasy XII is more linear in these aspects.
Background/Context: Both games seem to have the same amount of background information(I define this as information that is not required to know the story.) Final Fantasy XII's is more organized however. (There is an Ultimania guide from square enix that is the "official source" whereas Fallout 2 lacks such organization) This being said the background story of the main character in Fallout 2 (Along with his companions) is much more Vague than the information one is able to obtain About Lighting and her partners in Final Fantasy XII. Also Lighting Character develops as the story progresses, the same can not be said for the protagonist of Fallout 2.
Hmm, I did not compare Length and Real time/Turn based Gameplay.
For length I would have to say that is is same unless you want to replay the game again. (Fallout 2 has more incentives to do this than Final Fantasy XII) The easiest Example I can think of this is that if you make your Intelligence Stat low enough, your character will have different lines to say and is treated differently, also in regards to battle, depending on your skill set you can play the game guns blazing or play the game like its Metal Gear.
Turn Based/ Real time Gameplay:
The only reason I skipped this is because Fallout is purely turn based like Final Fantasy XIII.(Granted, your turns are much shorter than in previous Final Fantasies but you and your enemies both stand while they are waiting for their opponent to finish acting. Plus Final Fantasy XII has a lot of visual noise.) I will cite Baldur's Gate 2 as an example of a game which allows you to switch between real time and turn based gameplay with the press of a button. I can't think of no other game with such a feature. In order to stop this into turning into a big argument I will define Real Time Gameplay as gameplay in which you don't take turns or where such turns are imperceptible, also in a real time game you and your opponent can attack at the same exact time.
Soundtrack: The only way I can explain it is this, I have many, many console Video Game soundtracks while I only have one from a PC game.
Addition or modification of in-game assets:
This is a fancy term for Mods.
Basically games are made on PC's and developers that create exclusively or mainly for that platform tend to release tools that allow gamers to do as they please.(sometimes releasing the same tools that they have used to create the game)
One can say that this is why modding has not been done on consoles, I disagree I think it is more about how much the audience cares(or knows about the industry)about their token product or game, than anything else, it is probably possible to release modding tools for the Xbox 360 and PS3 games however videogame creators tend to release DLC for these consoles while such things are released for free for the PC.
A Console Gamer(if there is such a thing) is much more bound to pay for things developers offer to PC gamers for free. (On the same note I like the comment about DLC that is on the Final Fantasy XIII Page.) Although this might be because developers are not allowed the same freedom on PC than they are on console, which reminds of Development styles. 75.43.34.78 (talk) 06:16, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tone 

message: There's a lot of text above, so lemme take this section to summarize the arguments in an easier-to-read format:
* Original Poster (Jinnai): "Console" and "Computer" RPGs are essentially the same and refer mainly to the platforms they are presented on.  This article should be merged with a parent article, since the only major differences between Console and Computer RPGs have to do with their interfaces. (Update: Basing notability or definitions of the term "console RPG" on GameFAQs sites that simply list examples of games in the genre violates WP:SYNTH.)
** Percy Snoodle suggests Role-playing game (video games) as a merge target. Apologies, but the page has already been moved to Role-playing video game (a title without the disambiguation). Therefore, I'm just going to change the merge tags from "combine" to point to that article. I agree with Jinnai's point as well, in that the classifications are arbitrary and often incorrect.--ZXCVBNM (TALK) 01:32, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Also that the only evidence given, primarily by Crmartell, would violate WP:SYNTH and i would oppose anything on that kind of ground as it would compromise our core Wikipedian principles.陣内Jinnai 22:29, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Summarizing positions

message: I resurrected part of the original article, removing all non-History related content. It was simply too bulky to merge into Role-playing video game. I suggest the new merge target to be History of role-playing video games, along with History of computer role-playing games. SharkD  Talk  18:19, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I copied the History-related content from both articles to History of role-playing video games. I screwed up the location of this Talk page in the process though. SharkD  Talk  18:50, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The misplacement seems to be fixed. SharkD  Talk  19:18, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Partial resurrection 

message: This article can be expanded by referring to all RPGs abstractly. KyuuA4 (talk) 20:00, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done Miqademus (talk) 15:41, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Abstract