Your unpopular gaming opinions.

[pizzasafari]

A rose by any other name would smell just as sweet.

I don't think it's stupid at all, they're Western-style and Japanese-style. If you don't like the semantics of it then you can go ahead and make your own distinctions, I'm just saying there's an important distinction to make at the very least between what we consider to be WRPGs and JRPGs regardless of what we call them. Generally speaking, you go into any game under the "JRPG" umbrella looking for the same thing (turn based/ATB or similar combat is the most important part, but a specific kind of storytelling and character focus is also one of the biggest draws) and you also go into any game under the "WRPG" umbrella looking for the same thing (action-focused combat, quests, character customisation, loot, etc). There is some common ground between the two genres like levels, open world etc but that's why they're both RPGs, just like FPS and TPS both involve shooting guns but from different perspectives, and that different perspective is a big enough of a difference for us to consider them separate genres even though it's normally the exact same kind of game otherwise.

There are JRPGs/WRPGs that use elements from both, but genre blending is hardly rare. More often than not though these are what I consider to be the misnamed 'JRPGs' that are not JRPGs. I feel like the JRPG genre is a more specific one than WRPG and it's easier to fall out of being a JRPG than it is to fall into it. Every time I hear someone call the Nier games JRPGs I want to punch a nun.

But I love JRPGs for the same reasons everyone else who loves JRPGs loves them and if everyone stopped using the name then it would be incredibly hard to find them. The fact that everyone knows (well, most people) what you're referring to when you refer to JRPGs speaks for itself.

[Agozer]

I've always considered the co-called WRPGS being more geared towards swords and sorcery, and somewhat more grounded in reality (I know that sounds weird) whereas JRPGs are far more "out there" in terms of design, both artistically and mechanically. Well, then there's the fact that many JRPGs simply have that Japanese anime aesthetic.

[kashell]

But you call Call of Duty a First Person Shooter and Gears of War a Third Person Shooter. The names might be poorly chosen but they're so named purely because the JRPG genre popularised in Japan and the WRPG genre popularised in the west. But they're two distinct genres. Final Fantasy is a JRPG and Dark Souls is, as far as I'm concerned, a WRPG. The two games are nothing alike.

That's really an apples an oranges comparison. Keep in mind that games with a first person perspective can have a third person perspective. Even an RPG like Sudeki gives you that option.

If you're looking for a game in the same vein as Final Fantasy you'd be like "Yo, recommend me a JRPG". If the two words were to disappear you'd ask for RPG recommendations hoping for things like Persona and instead have games like Gothic thrown at you. It's an important distinction to make.

Would you, though? Final Fantasy is a poor example and that example is a silly way to ask for a game recommendation. Final Fantasy has gone through so many changes; if someone wanted a game like Final Fantasy then they might as well ask for a food that has carbs. There are so many options. If they wanted a game like a specific entry in the Final Fantasy franchise, that would be more realistic.

You have to keep in mind that in this modern era, you have videos, screenshots, reviews, blogs, podcasts, and more to help you determine whether or not a game would be enjoyable.

But I love JRPGs for the same reasons everyone else who loves JRPGs loves them and if everyone stopped using the name then it would be incredibly hard to find them. The fact that everyone knows (well, most people) what you're referring to when you refer to JRPGs speaks for itself.

Again, it sounds like you're not giving people enough credit. I'll give a personal example.

During the SNES era, a friend of mine asked me whether or not like I liked RPGs. I didn't know what an RPG was, so he mentioned Final Fantasy II (IV). That was all it took. Later that day we were hanging out and we played Might and Magic on his PC.

That was enough for me to understand the RPG concept. There was no need to attach any extra lettering to them.
---------
I'm not going to try to change anyone's opinions. This is why we're posting our opinions in the "unpopular gaming opinions" thread. There's no J or W or any other letter that needs to go before the RPG acronym.

[Cartagia]

I'm not going to try to change anyone's opinions. This is why we're posting our opinions in the "unpopular gaming opinions" thread. There's no J or W or any other letter that needs to go before the RPG acronym.

You are 100% correct, they don't *need* to be there, but they *are* helpful descriptors, particularly for modern games.

I used to think I was super into RPGs when all I primarily played were the Western-style ones.  Then I tried playing some JRPGs and found myself dumbfounded.  I kind of hated them.  There were the occasional titles that shone through (Chrono Trigger and Super Mario RPG), but for the most part the writing style and (UGH) random encounters turned me off.  Turns out I was way more into the Western-style games.

As for general unpopular opinions:

• Most 3-D fifth generation games are nigh unplayable now.  Nostalgia be damned.
• Metal Gear Solid is an overwrought, overbaked game series that isn't serious enough to be taken seriously and isn't funny enough to be funny and is generally a chore to play through.
• Based on some comments in another thread this'll be unpopular - Tetris is one of the best games ever made.

[pizzasafari]

That's really an apples an oranges comparison. Keep in mind that games with a first person perspective can have a third person perspective. Even an RPG like Sudeki gives you that option.

It is, but that's my point. Oranges and apples are two different fruits. JRPGs and WRPGs/FPS and TPS are two different genres. And they do, absolutely. But that's not really relevant to the matter of RPGs. Perspective isn't something that affects an RPG. That's an interesting point to raise in the matter of FPS/TPS though.

Would you, though? Final Fantasy is a poor example and that example is a silly way to ask for a game recommendation. Final Fantasy has gone through so many changes; if someone wanted a game like Final Fantasy then they might as well ask for a food that has carbs. There are so many options. If they wanted a game like a specific entry in the Final Fantasy franchise, that would be more realistic.

I was just throwing that out as an example, when I talk about Final Fantasy I normally mean the first 10. I don't consider 11, 12, 14 or 15 to be JRPGs. 11 and 14 are MMOs, 15 is an Action RPG. I dunno what 12 is, I just like shit-talking it. But you know what I'm talking about. JRPGs have a fanbase for a reason. There's enough about JRPGs to make them distinct from standard WRPGs, that's the point I'm making.

Again, it sounds like you're not giving people enough credit. I'll give a personal example.

During the SNES era, a friend of mine asked me whether or not like I liked RPGs. I didn't know what an RPG was, so he mentioned Final Fantasy II (IV). That was all it took. Later that day we were hanging out and we played Might and Magic on his PC.

That was enough for me to understand the RPG concept. There was no need to attach any extra lettering to them.

I get that, but what I mean is that there's a clear divide between what we enjoy in a western RPG and what we enjoy in a JRPG. If I feel like the kind of experience you normally get from a JRPG, I'll seek out a JRPG. If I want to create a character and go on a customised adventure I'll seek out a western RPG. There are a lot of people that like western-style RPGs that utterly hate JRPGs, and for reasons I can understand. And vice-versa.

I'm not going to try to change anyone's opinions. This is why we're posting our opinions in the "unpopular gaming opinions" thread. There's no J or W or any other letter that needs to go before the RPG acronym.

Of course, I just feel like's a lot of conflicting perspectives when it comes to the JRPG/WRPG distinction in general and I'm doing my bit to try and clear the waters. If you still disagree that's fine, I just wanted to explain where we're coming from. Healthy discussion and all that. That and I'm cripplingly bored and discussing this kind of thing is fun.

[kashell]

It is, but that's my point. Oranges and apples are two different fruits. JRPGs and WRPGs/FPS and TPS are two different genres. And they do, absolutely. But that's not really relevant to the matter of RPGs. Perspective isn't something that affects an RPG. That's an interesting point to raise in the matter of FPS/TPS though.

Perspective definitely affects an RPG. I'm not even just talking about a dungeon crawler where you move from square to square like Dungeon Travelers vs. a something more topdown like a traditional Final Fantasy. The way a battle unfolds. The transition from one area to another. A world map. Things like that are very important.

I was just throwing that out as an example, when I talk about Final Fantasy I normally mean the first 10. I don't consider 11, 12, 14 or 15 to be JRPGs. 11 and 14 are MMOs, 15 is an Action RPG. I dunno what 12 is, I just like shit-talking it. But you know what I'm talking about. JRPGs have a fanbase for a reason. There's enough about JRPGs to make them distinct from standard WRPGs, that's the point I'm making.

I understand your point. I just don't adhere to it. I call them RPGs, especially when there are so many blurred lines.

I get that, but what I mean is that there's a clear divide between what we enjoy in a western RPG and what we enjoy in a JRPG. If I feel like the kind of experience you normally get from a JRPG, I'll seek out a JRPG. If I want to create a character and go on a customised adventure I'll seek out a western RPG. There are a lot of people that like western-style RPGs that utterly hate JRPGs, and for reasons I can understand. And vice-versa.

Genres are so mixed these days that you'd be better off widening your search beyond genres.

Of course, I just feel like's a lot of conflicting perspectives when it comes to the JRPG/WRPG distinction in general and I'm doing my bit to try and clear the waters. If you still disagree that's fine, I just wanted to explain where we're coming from. Healthy discussion and all that. That and I'm cripplingly bored and discussing this kind of thing is fun.

I understand where everyone is coming from. This is the only thread (at least in recent memory) where I brought up this issue because that's what the TC asked for.

My perspective is that an RPG is an RPG.

It's kind of like the issue when people call something like Guilty Gear an "anime fighter" and Tekken a "realistic fighter." They're fighting games - it's up to the consumer to decide whether or not the mechanics behind the fighting game is something they'd like.

[boozeburger]

I'm not at all into turn-based/JRPGs.  I've checked out a few through the years, and friends have certainly tried turning me on to series like Final Fantasy, but they just aren't my scene.  I find the combat systems terribly boring, and they seem very derivative of each other.
When Pokemon was released I grabbed both available versions because I wanted to see what all the hype was about.  Within an hour or so of playing, I was finished.  Gave them to my (then) brother-in-law and never looked back, heh.

[rayne315]

I enjoyed FF7 Dirge of Cerberus WAY more than FF7

not really unpopular but FF6 (American FF3) is the best RPG I have ever played.

Although I LOVE collecting for handheld games (they are just so plentiful and cheap) I have only ever played through ~20 of them total. and of everything I have played I only truly liked the early Pokémon games (Gen 3 and before).

the best handheld console ever made was the neo geo pocket color. and that statement is 100% based on the build quality for the system.

ive disliked every 3d platformer I have ever played until super Mario odyssey came out.

I truly like FPS games but they have become both a dime a dozen and the cess pool of the gaming industry, but I will still sink hours and hours into them.

harvest moon/animal crossing games are mind numbingly tedious with my only joy of them being learning to min-max the system for the most profit.

with that said I Really enjoy Stardew valley even though what I specifically enjoy about it is what I hate about harvest moon/animal crossing

although I am a Nintendo fan I Hate the fact that they get credited with creating a whole bunch of things they never did. like joysticks and d-pads. they were in arcades Way before Nintendo consoles.

I cannot for the life of me understand how Microsoft didn't lose a class action lawsuit for the Xbox 360's failure rate but the Sony lost one for removing the ability to put Linux on the PS3.

I never understood why Right handed people just accept the fact that on arcade machines the joystick is on the left. Yeah we grew up with it that way it would be hard to switch now but your dominant hand is better at precise movements so you would do better moving with it. while your non-dominant hand is significantly worse so it would be better suited as the button presser.

Cheat codes define my enjoyment of PS2 games. if there are no cheat codes I probably will not like it but if there are a lot of them and comical ones at that I am more inclined to like them. nothing like flying into the sky on a skateboard forever or making a tank fly.

Modern day games are getting less fun by the year. they still seem to be in the mindset that large cut scenes, ultra realistic graphics, and multiplayer make the game.

The only thing Breath of the wild had going for it was the large open map. the quests were bland, the landscape was way too empty of things to do, the weapons were WAY too brittle, the puzzles were way too easy, etc

Nintendo could easily be beaten out of the game hardware market but never will be because both Sony and Microsoft seem to forget that Nintendo is their competition as well.

[Agozer]

although I am a Nintendo fan I Hate the fact that they get credited with creating a whole bunch of things they never did. like joysticks and d-pads. they were in arcades Way before Nintendo consoles.

From what I understand, Nintendo gets credit specifically for "inventing" the standard D-Pad with the cross shape and first ever analog stick for home consoles. Prior to this, every home console and computer only had joysticks.

[aliensstudios]

harvest moon/animal crossing games are mind numbingly tedious with my only joy of them being learning to min-max the system for the most profit.

Modern day games are getting less fun by the year. they still seem to be in the mindset that large cut scenes, ultra realistic graphics, and multiplayer make the game.

The only thing Breath of the wild had going for it was the large open map. the quests were bland, the landscape was way too empty of things to do, the weapons were WAY too brittle, the puzzles were way too easy, etc

Those are pretty much my sentiments exactly. I've never understood what people found to be fun in Animal Crossing / Harvest Moon. I agree that modern games haven't been great really since 2005 or so. One the 360 and PS3 came out, objectively poor games started getting free passes for having good graphics and cinematics.
Breath of the Wild is my least enjoyed Zelda game. The open world makes it feel disjointed, the characters are extremely bland (they made Link even worse somehow) and it lacks the heart of Zelda. If this is the way future Zelda games are going to be, count me out.

[stealthrush]

I knew I was forgetting another unpopular opinion (at least these days..) I agree with kashell original post.

Disturbing demographic classifications.
Genres should be classified based on their play-style not country.

By giving asinine genre titles such as JRPG (Japanese Role-Playing Game) The actual description is lost. It narrows it down to a non-existing formula of 'style' which can combine other elements sub-genres ultimately making the term meaningless. The fact that King's Field is a WRPG is a good example.

The King's Field Series demonstrates the hypocrisy.
The King's Field Series is an first-person role playing video game.

[rayne315]

although I am a Nintendo fan I Hate the fact that they get credited with creating a whole bunch of things they never did. like joysticks and d-pads. they were in arcades Way before Nintendo consoles.

From what I understand, Nintendo gets credit specifically for "inventing" the standard D-Pad with the cross shape and first ever analog stick for home consoles. Prior to this, every home console and computer only had joysticks.

although it is not 100% cross shaped this is what came out with the first cross shaped d-pad

https://vgcollect.com/item/19348

although I do have to admit the Milton Bradley never did file the patent for it.

pulled from Wikipedia:

The first consumer games console which had analog joysticks was the Prinztronic/Acetronic/Interton series, launched in 1976. This system was widely cloned throughout Europe and available under several brand names. The 2 sticks each used a pair of potentiometers, but were not self-centering.[5]

In 1989, Dempa released an analog thumbstick controller for Japanese computers and consoles called the XE-1 AP.[11] This new controller included a thumb-operated control stick which allowed for varying levels of movement and near-360-degree control, translating into far more precise movements than were possible with a D-pad. It also distinguished itself by having the player control it with the thumb, similar to a D-pad, rather than gripping a handle.

[Agozer]

The more you know. Still I'm more surprised that it took Nintendo and the N64 for analog sticks to become a thing.

[burningdoom]

I knew I was forgetting another unpopular opinion (at least these days..) I agree with kashell original post.

Disturbing demographic classifications.
Genres should be classified based on their play-style not country.

By giving asinine genre titles such as JRPG (Japanese Role-Playing Game) The actual description is lost. It narrows it down to a non-existing formula of 'style' which can combine other elements sub-genres ultimately making the term meaningless. The fact that King's Field is a WRPG is a good example.

The King's Field Series demonstrates the hypocrisy.
The King's Field Series is an first-person role playing video game.

It's not just style or just gameplay mechanics. It's a combination of the two. Which aren't meaningless because more than one person has had no problem describing it in this thread.

And yeah, WRPG fits King's Field to a "T", despite it having Japanese origins. It's like an updated version of Wizardry or an old D&D game. Like I said earlier in this discussion, it's more a mechanics and style thing than it is a country of origin thing.

They are well-defined and classified sub-genres (that multiple people in this thread have now shown can easily be separated).

To say they are the same would be like saying there's no difference between slasher movies and zombies movies, it's all horror. No, there's a difference. They may both be horror, but they both have discernible differences that can classify them into sub-genres; same as JRPG or WRPG.

Those aren't even the only two sub-genres of RPGs. We also have action-RPGs, strategy-RPGs, dungeon-crawlers, and Rogue-like RPGs.

It's not like it's some negative label or something, either. It's just an easier way to narrow-down and identify what types of games you are playing when you're talking about them.

[pacgamer89]

Final Fantasy VII isn't a good game and Final Fantasy VIII is much better.

Super Mario 64 is the worst Mario main series game ever released.

F-Zero is a terrible series.

Super Mario Sunshine isn't worth 60 bucks.

Legend Of Zelda Breath Of The Wild isn't as good as everyone says.

The Nintendo 64 is very overrated with its terrible controller and the majority of the games on the system that arent good. Its basically the original Wii.