As someone who's played, and enjoyed, equal amounts of WRPGs and JRPGs, sure. But summarizing the appeal of JRPGs in a one off sentence isn't so easy. I'll do something different:
Top 5 common characteristics of WRPGs*
Create your own protagonist(s) = good for self expression
Highly nonlinear campaign = good for longer lasting sandbox fun
Total moral freedom = good for roleplaying elasticity
Western high fantasy setting = good for fans of Tolkien-esque aesthetics
Interactive world elements = good for physical object manipulation (for puzzles or emergent gameplay)
Top 5 common characteristics of JRPGs*
Predefined protagonist(s) = good for defined storytelling purposes
Front and center plot exposition = good for making the gameplay feel consistently purposeful
Variety of world settings = good for folks tired of Tolkien-esque aesthetics
Complex battle systems = good for players who enjoy tinkering with deeper battle mechanics
Linear game progression = good for gamers shorter on play time
So depending on what aspects you're seeking from an RPG, either the WRPG or JRPG approach could be more appealing. But one is not better than the other, not in any objective sense. Each approach has as many weaknesses as strengths. Those saying otherwise are either uninformed due to lacking a solid frame of experienced reference, or they have some misconceived agenda to push.
*This is all a gross generalization based on the most common foundations among these two expressions of RPG. You can indeed find WRPGs that ape aspects of the JRPG formula, as well as the inverse being true as well. In recent times schools of thought from both approaches have crossbred and homogenized. The stalwart modern WRPGs that refuse to accept Eastern influence tend to be crowdfunded, and thus are immune to modern demographic influence.