Game News Jade Empire: Special Edition in Jan 2007

[Lumpy]

But discovering the story was the biggest part of the gameplay.

 

[gromit]

Relationships with party-members in PS:T do not influence the main storyline like they did in BG2: Shadows of Amn. All of the dialogues are great, but the only reward you got after unlocking another side of relationship with certain character is the upgrade of his stats and a new tattoo available at Fell’s place.

They may not trigger any cutscenes, launch any sidequests (barring unlocking the circle,) or even make anything down the line happen any differently, but I'll take advantage of your wording and say that they very much influence the main storyline. The game's story is 90% interpretation, after all.

Sweet Jesus Christ, don't spoil the story.

Oh fuck... sorry, dude. Don't worry, what occurs with them is vastly more important than their mere presence... it's not an "OMG I'M REVAN" thing. Tell ya what, I'll spoilerize my spoiler, you fix it in your quote of me, deal? Hey, mods, maybe the cell-interior colors should be among the selectable presets, for people who don't want to check the source for the hex code?

 

[suibhne]

And your control over TNO's character is light-years beyond what you get in a typical JRPG, where you have zero (or at most nearly zero) control over the main character's development, personality, relationships, etc.

All of these features were represented with non-linear dialogues

So, because some of those features were accomplished through dialogue, the game design feature is actually the dialogue rather than, say, being able to determine TNO's alignment, class, skills, etc.?

That doesn't make much sense to me. PS:T had lots of well-written dialogue (as do some JRPGs...some), but it also had a higher degree of customization/development for the main character than I've seen in any JRPG I've played (tho less than many other CRPGs like BG2).

You can't change armour, appearance or weapon of party characters. But you can give TNO an axe, knife or warhammer Impressive.

Um...the game was released in 1999, using a 2D engine. In any case, you also can't change the appearance of any of your BG or BG2 party members (other than changing armor), and you certainly can't do much with party members you're given in a JRPG. What do you expect, and what does this have to do with whether or not it's an RPG?

Relationships with party-members in PS:T do not influence the main storyline like they did in BG2: Shadows of Amn. All of the dialogues are great, but the only reward you got after unlocking another side of relationship with certain character is the upgrade of his stats and a new tattoo available at Fell’s place.

Maybe I'm forgetting something, but how again did intraparty dynamics have any effect at all on BG2's plot? Sure, some character relationships affected other character relationships, but that was it. Even the big choice between Bohdi and the Thieves Guild turns out to be a distinction without any difference whatsoever, and it's still far more significant than anything done by any of your party members. For the sake of comparison, Vhailor's interaction with Trias feels much more important to me (even tho it really has no impact on the plot, either).

PS:T don’t even have bonus cut-scenes.

What does this have to do with whether it's an RPG?

FFX-2 offers a lot of side-quests with 2 or 4 ways to compete them. It also has about 4 different endings.

Cool. That means it's very different from all of the other FF games I've played. I'm not sure that it makes a difference here, tho, because you're comparing PS:T to "any JRPG" - to JRPGs as a set of generic conventions - and it would be a major stretch to say that "tons of sidequests with multiple solutions" is a generic convention of all (or even most) JRPGs.

I don’t agree that PS:T combat is similar to the BG1-2 combat. While BG encounters require a lot of movement and planning PS:T battle is a sequence of spells and power-ups.

Well, I don't think anyone said that PS:T combat is similar to BG1-2 combat (other than the obvious fact that they're using the same engine - which wasn't said, but probably shouldn't need to be said either). I don't know what you mean by saying that PS:T battles are "a sequence of spells and power-ups" - BG2 placed far more emphasis on big spell battles - but I suspect this is just the language barrier at work. No big.

What I said was the PS:T's antecedents (or "influences", if you'd prefer) are clearly D&D (especially the Manual of the Planes) and BG, and probably some earlier CRPGs as well. I doubt PS:T was even vaguely inspired by JRPGs, and anyway you keep citing JRPGs that were released after PS:T (FF VIII, FF X-2, FF, XII).

Overall...I just don't know what you're arguing. Sure, PS:T has some elements in common with JRPG generic conventions; aweigh's list is very good. But it's also striking dissimilar in important ways, and I think it's a clear case of an American CRPG evolving toward a common set of conventions rather than consciously modelling itself after a JRPG. The only thing on aweigh's list that I think was shamelessly stolen from JRPGs is the cutscenes for high-level spells.

 

[Admiral Rimjob POOBUM]

I doubt PS:T was even vaguely inspired by JRPGs

I seem to recall reading somewhere that they were slightly influenced by FFVII as regards to focusing on plot and characters, but don't quote me on that...

 

[Lumpy]

According to Chris Avellone, Planescape: Torment has numerous inspirations from a variety of books, comics, and games. Notable works among them include Archie Comics, The Chronicles of Amber, The Elementals, Final Fantasy, and Shadowrun.[3]

 

[Leo Valesko]

Um...the game was released in 1999, using a 2D engine. In any case, you also can't change the appearance of any of your BG or BG2 party members (other than changing armor), and you certainly can't do much with party members you're given in a JRPG. Laughing

There are no basic armour images or basic weapon set for your characters. The manner they introduced to player as unique personalities with certain clothes and weapon design is a very similar to jRPG's.

Cool. That means it's very different from all of the other FF games I've played.

Ah… it actually sucks. But the idea wasn’t so bad

What does this have to do with whether it's an RPG?

It’s one of the proofs that your choices in party-dialogues or side-quests don’t really affect the main plot of the game.

Even the big choice between Bohdi and the Thieves Guild turns out to be a distinction without any difference whatsoever, and it's still far more significant than anything done by any of your party members.

If you have a romance with a certain party member – Bodhi will kidnap that character. Also many dialogue lines appear if you have a romance.

For the sake of comparison, Vhailor's interaction with Trias feels much more important to me (even tho it really has no impact on the plot, either).

This is one of the few such moments in PS:T. While BG2 and Fallout 2 have lots of them.


I never claimed PS:T to be inspired by any jRPG. I simply noted the fact they have much in common. Man, looks like even thinking of that makes you treat me like a some kind of heretic

 

[aweigh]

You've gotta admit that most CRPG's are usually sandbox in some way or another. They make your characters "avatars" instead of "characters" because they want you LARP the game, and they make the world/towns/people as generic as possible for the setting so that they serve mostly as quest dispensers. There's no "LIFE" to them because they want the game to be appeal to supposedly "adult" sensibilities. (i.e. realism, historicity, sandbox, etc.)

I mean, I can't remember one single NPC from BG1 or BG2 that served as anything other than than a plot-mover or quest-dispenser. The majority of the NPC's even recycled the same ambiance dialogue. This is only one of the reasons the BG/IWD series of games are so forgettable in comparison to PS:T or Fallout. In those I always wanted to reach the next area and talk to the people to see what they had to say.

These are just general impressions I've developed through the years. When I was a child I used to love JRPG's mostly because they fired up my imagination with the bright characters and vivid worlds, and the rudimentary storytelling was enough to get me going back then. Once I discovered CRPG's I started to realize what a real RPG can be, with choices and consequences for your actions, something not present in most JRPG's. PS:T seems like it was the perfect mix of both those schools of RPG design, and I doubt it'll be topped any time soon.

EDIT: Oh, to Lumpy: well, without getting into a discussion about what gameplay is, when I said I talk about playing through PS:T "for the story and characters" I mean that I found the combat tedious, as it was an even more dumbed-down version of the IE combat found in BG/IWD, and that when I played it I was already developing a dislike for pointing and clicking to move my avatars. I played through it because I loved talking to the NPC's, continuing the story and looking at the awesome 2D art, which is stuff I don't actually consider "gameplay" but of course I know that's debatable.

I mean, is reading "gameplay"?

 

[suibhne]

I'm still not sure what I'm arguing against here, because I don't really know what anyone else is arguing. But anyway, I figured I'd take a look at aweigh's list.

1. Party members have a unique look which you can't change.

Okay. I'm not sure this is a big deal, since it was also mostly the case in earlier American RPGs, but I get what you're saying: JRPGs place much more emphasis on characters looking exactly the same throughout the entire game, no matter what they're wearing.

2. Plot develops in a linear structure guiding you from point A to point B.

PS:T was no different in this regard than the IE games which preceded and immediately followed it. In fact, it very closely mirrors the structure of the original BG: lots of openness after the initial dungeon (or opener), but each "chapter" opens up specific areas and further constrains the story. This is actually the converse of the pattern established by Square in the FF series, which keep a tight rein on freedom until the last quarter of the game (or even later in FFX :wink: ).

3. Spells feature cinematic cutscenes that take control away from the player.

Absolutely pulled right from JRPGs. I'm on board with this one.

4. There are several in-game cinematic cutscenes which feature unique character model animations that are otherwise unreproducable once gameplay resumes.

That's a big stretch. You could just as easily say PS:T was inspired by the original Half-Life in this regard, or you could look at Half-Life and figure out that the whole market was catching the "cinematic" bug and expanding its toolset to enable that sort of presentation. Maybe it came entirely from Japan, but I'm skeptical.

5. As was mentioned about a million times: the interparty dialogues that serve to elaborate their persoanlities and past histories.

Which already happened (in a more rudimentary way) in Fallout, Fallout 2, and Baldur's Gate, and they were hardly the first. I'll agree that JRPGs placed more emphasis earlier on a cast of extensively-developed party members, and it would make sense if MCA said "Hey, we got our ideas about party design from those Nippon whatchamacallits - role-playing gizmos or whatnot", but I don't see any reason he couldn't have gotten the same idea from previous American RPGs.

6. The storyline, characters and setting are all distinctive and imaginative, and more to the point, unique in comparison to the glut of fantasy CRPG's.

Regardless of whether or not JRPG's are *good* or *bad*, the vast majority of them, if not ALL of them, use a brand-new world/setting/characters, mostly in opposite to CRPG's, which usually use some recycled license like D&D/Star Wars or something incredibly derivative.

Except that PS:T uses a well-established D&D setting... Granted, Avellone & Co. were no doubt looking for a way to exploit the D&D license/branding in a totally fresh way and PS is certainly more obscure than FR, but don't mistake PS:T for taking place in a totally sui generis world. It's actually a pretty traditional presentation of Sigil and the Planes. In any case, the different FF worlds, created "anew" for each installment (with the most immediate exception of FFXII, released later this month), have so much in common that it seems pretty tough to describe them all as "brand-new" worlds/settings - unless you happen to think that every single world needs the same exact summons and the same goddamn Chocobos. Suikoden games all take place in the same world (taken from Chinese literature); ditto for Grandia, Star Ocean, etc. Your claim that "the vast majority of [JRPGs], if not ALL of them, use a brand-new world/setting/characters" just isn't correct.

Most western CRPG's have completely worthless storylines and plot and worthless throwaway characters that hold absolutely zero interest for the player, but they play on because they like the actual gameplay mechanics and enjoy *playing* the game.

This is in stark contrast to most JRPG players who usually find playing the game boring or tedious, (although most don't know they do, they just accept tedious gameplay as standard), and play on to find out what happens in the plot, or what happens to a certain character. (read: Xenogears/Xenosaga/Final Fantasy players in particular.)

This is a pretty big generalization, and I'm not sure it's correct based on what I know of the Japanese market. Some of the most popular series in Japan - like the long-running series that had a few installments localized here as Digitial Devil Saga - have totally threadbare plots and are popular primarily for their gameplay. Most of the market isn't Xenogears, you know. I'm not arguing with your point that narrative is often much more important than gameplay in JRPGs, but it's also commonly the opposite; I'm not sure we can draw clear parallels to PS:T other than saying that, sure, maybe Avellone saw something he really liked in one particular title or series - not JRPGs in general, as some folks here have argued.

 

[suibhne]

If you have a romance with a certain party member – Bodhi will kidnap that character. Also many dialogue lines appear if you have a romance.

Which has absolutely zero effect on the main plot. Heck, you have to go after Bodhi one way or the other. (Incidentally, it's really cheap and funny to get Anomen to a very high level, cast "Invis" on him, and let him waltz around the entire lair detonating every single vamp with "Turn Undead". )

For the sake of comparison, Vhailor's interaction with Trias feels much more important to me (even tho it really has no impact on the plot, either).

This is one of the few such moments in PS:T. While BG2 and Fallout 2 have lots of them.

Name them. I've played and re-played both of those titles, and it's pretty tough for me to think of places in either of them where your party members act independently in ways that directly affect main plot-critical characters. Sure, Jaheira and Keldorn both run away at some point, etc. etc., but those things have zero effect on the game's plot; you can just ignore their departures and keep on playing if you don't care.

I'm not suggesting that PS:T did any more with this stuff, really. I just don't see how BG2 or FO2 have anything on PS:T in this department.

I never claimed PS:T to be inspired by any jRPG. I simply noted the fact they have much in common. Man, looks like even thinking of that makes you treat me like a some kind of heretic

No, not a heretic at all. And I obviously misread you, because I thought you were suggesting that PS:T took a lot of inspiration from JRPGs. Sorry. :wink:

 

[aweigh]

I'm still not sure what I'm arguing against here, because I don't really know what anyone else is arguing. But anyway, I figured I'd take a look at aweigh's list.

1. Party members have a unique look which you can't change.

Okay. I'm not sure this is a big deal, since it was also mostly the case in earlier American RPGs, but I get what you're saying: JRPGs place much more emphasis on characters looking exactly the same throughout the entire game, no matter what they're wearing.

2. Plot develops in a linear structure guiding you from point A to point B.

PS:T was no different in this regard than the IE games which preceded and immediately followed it. In fact, it very closely mirrors the structure of the original BG: lots of openness after the initial dungeon (or opener), but each "chapter" opens up specific areas and further constrains the story. This is actually the converse of the pattern established by Square in the FF series, which keep a tight rein on freedom until the last quarter of the game (or even later in FFX :wink: ).

3. Spells feature cinematic cutscenes that take control away from the player.

Absolutely pulled right from JRPGs. I'm on board with this one.

4. There are several in-game cinematic cutscenes which feature unique character model animations that are otherwise unreproducable once gameplay resumes.

That's a big stretch. You could just as easily say PS:T was inspired by the original Half-Life in this regard, or you could look at Half-Life and figure out that the whole market was catching the "cinematic" bug and expanding its toolset to enable that sort of presentation. Maybe it came entirely from Japan, but I'm skeptical.

5. As was mentioned about a million times: the interparty dialogues that serve to elaborate their persoanlities and past histories.

Which already happened (in a more rudimentary way) in Fallout, Fallout 2, and Baldur's Gate, and they were hardly the first. I'll agree that JRPGs placed more emphasis earlier on a cast of extensively-developed party members, and it would make sense if MCA said "Hey, we got our ideas about party design from those Nippon whatchamacallits - role-playing gizmos or whatnot", but I don't see any reason he couldn't have gotten the same idea from previous American RPGs.

6. The storyline, characters and setting are all distinctive and imaginative, and more to the point, unique in comparison to the glut of fantasy CRPG's.

Regardless of whether or not JRPG's are *good* or *bad*, the vast majority of them, if not ALL of them, use a brand-new world/setting/characters, mostly in opposite to CRPG's, which usually use some recycled license like D&D/Star Wars or something incredibly derivative.

Except that PS:T uses a well-established D&D setting... Granted, Avellone & Co. were no doubt looking for a way to exploit the D&D license/branding in a totally fresh way and PS is certainly more obscure than FR, but don't mistake PS:T for taking place in a totally sui generis world. It's actually a pretty traditional presentation of Sigil and the Planes. In any case, the different FF worlds, created "anew" for each installment (with the most immediate exception of FFXII, released later this month), have so much in common that it seems pretty tough to describe them all as "brand-new" worlds/settings - unless you happen to think that every single world needs the same exact summons and the same goddamn Chocobos. Suikoden games all take place in the same world (taken from Chinese literature); ditto for Grandia, Star Ocean, etc. Your claim that "the vast majority of [JRPGs], if not ALL of them, use a brand-new world/setting/characters" just isn't correct.

Most western CRPG's have completely worthless storylines and plot and worthless throwaway characters that hold absolutely zero interest for the player, but they play on because they like the actual gameplay mechanics and enjoy *playing* the game.

This is in stark contrast to most JRPG players who usually find playing the game boring or tedious, (although most don't know they do, they just accept tedious gameplay as standard), and play on to find out what happens in the plot, or what happens to a certain character. (read: Xenogears/Xenosaga/Final Fantasy players in particular.)

This is a pretty big generalization, and I'm not sure it's correct based on what I know of the Japanese market. Some of the most popular series in Japan - like the long-running series that had a few installments localized here as Digitial Devil Saga - have totally threadbare plots and are popular primarily for their gameplay. Most of the market isn't Xenogears, you know. I'm not arguing with your point that narrative is often much more important than gameplay in JRPGs, but it's also commonly the opposite; I'm not sure we can draw clear parallels to PS:T other than saying that, sure, maybe Avellone saw something he really liked in one particular title or series - not JRPGs in general, as some folks here have argued.

Sure, sure, you bring up lots of good points. I don't really have anything to add here, I mean, it's pretty much been established in the thread that PS:T shares certain design philosophies present in a lot of JRPG's. And yeah, I know the Planes are a DND license, but what I meant was that it was simply so different from the other medieval/fantasy-type CRPG's that all look like an indeterminate European setting.

Here's the best example I can use, though: I have a friend who is ONLY into JRPG's, and her constant blather about JRPG's eventually forced me to try to convert her to real RPG's, so I lent her Arcanum and PS:T, my two favorite CRPG's, and guess which one she liked? She played through PS:T and while it didn't change her values on what constitutes a good RPG, (in fact, when she saw it for the first time she kept saying it looked like Diablo which made me want to smack her), she definitely enjoyed the game. Not so for Arcanum, she found it too boring.

 

[suibhne]

Here's the best example I can use, though: I have a friend who is ONLY into JRPG's, and her constant blather about JRPG's eventually forced me to try to convert her to real RPG's, so I lent her Arcanum and PS:T, my two favorite CRPG's, and guess which one she liked?

Only next to Arcanum will PS:T ever look approachable. :wink:

I'm actually getting back into JRPGs and getting a kick out of it. Sure, they're not good RPGs in the sense we talk about here, but some of them are still great fun. I'm just starting Shadow Hearts (not Kingdom Hearts :wink: ) and finding it to be pretty interesting and mature, even tho the gameplay is a little dull so far.

 

[aweigh]

You know, a while ago I was going on here about how I was pretty pumped for FF12, because it was being made by the FFT team and all that jazz. But then I played the english version today... (yeah, english version's already leaked on torrent sites.)

My god what a boring fucking game. The battle system isn't so much KOTOR, (as I first thought), as it is an even duller version of FF Online combat. There's incredibly little strategy involved, even less so than in the KOTORs, and once you set up your auto-potions and whatnot you can pretty much go grab a sammich while your chars level up.

As far as the story/JRPG'ness goes, the first 2 hours were chock full of cliche'd anime cutscenes, but I was sorta surprised at the quality British voice actors they went with. I can't really remember why I thought the game would be different from what it is.

A weird thing I happened to notice is that the game is full of fed-ex style side-quests, like something we would see in a Baldur's Gate or ToEE's Hommlett (shudder), but except that in Japan apparently side-quests mean you-have-to-do-them-anyway-to-progress-quests. Ah well, I guess those crazy japs ARE learning something from western RPG developers.

 

[kris]

1. Party members have a unique look which you can't change.

Okay. I'm not sure this is a big deal, since it was also mostly the case in earlier American RPGs, but I get what you're saying: JRPGs place much more emphasis on characters looking exactly the same throughout the entire game, no matter what they're wearing.

this is more a difference between games where you create your party and ones you do not. CRPGs have a lot more of the party creating ones. But the new "Bioware" trend is around predefined party members that you can't change the appearance of.

 

[Leo Valesko]

There's incredibly little strategy involved, even less so than in the KOTORs, and once you set up your auto-potions and whatnot you can pretty much go grab a sammich while your chars level up

Did you completed the game? I’m playing for 10 hours now and a lot of strategy already involved. A lot better than KOTOR.

As far as the story/JRPG'ness goes, the first 2 hours were chock full of cliche'd anime cutscenes,

True. As well as any JRPG. But I prefer anime cliché over a chosen-one topless sweaty barbarian with a two-handed sword and magic leather underwear.

A weird thing I happened to notice is that the game is full of fed-ex style side-quests, like something we would see in a Baldur's Gate or ToEE's Hommlett (shudder), but except that in Japan apparently side-quests mean you-have-to-do-them-anyway-to-progress-quests.

They are NOT side-quests You can just determine which of the story-line quests to complete in a first place.

but I was sorta surprised at the quality British voice actors they went with.

I haven’t got an English version because I’m playing the Japanese FFXII.

Japanese can't be translated properly into English. Voice-actors in FFX, X-2 and XII were awful if you compare them with Japanese. I was surprised how many mistakes were made during the translation of FFVII and FFX…

Anyway I think FFXII is a great game, although I like Xenosaga episode 3 even more.

Please, avoid any spoilers if you already completed the game

Ah well, I guess those crazy japs ARE learning something from western RPG developers.

oh my god, I'm afraid to think what can they learn from fuckers like Bethesda or BioWare.

I'm just starting Shadow Hearts (not Kingdom Hearts ) and finding it to be pretty interesting and mature, even tho the gameplay is a little dull so far.

“From the New World”? Yeah, Shadow Hearts is a good JRPG but the first game had a boring gameplay.

 

[aweigh]

There's incredibly little strategy involved, even less so than in the KOTORs, and once you set up your auto-potions and whatnot you can pretty much go grab a sammich while your chars level up

Did you completed the game? I’m playing for 10 hours now and a lot of strategy already involved. A lot better than KOTOR.

As far as the story/JRPG'ness goes, the first 2 hours were chock full of cliche'd anime cutscenes,

True. As well as any JRPG. But I prefer anime cliché over a chosen-one topless sweaty barbarian with a two-handed sword and magic leather underwear.

A weird thing I happened to notice is that the game is full of fed-ex style side-quests, like something we would see in a Baldur's Gate or ToEE's Hommlett (shudder), but except that in Japan apparently side-quests mean you-have-to-do-them-anyway-to-progress-quests.

They are NOT side-quests You can just determine which of the story-line quests to complete in a first place.

but I was sorta surprised at the quality British voice actors they went with.

I haven’t got an English version because I’m playing the Japanese FFXII.

Japanese can't be translated properly into English. Voice-actors in FFX, X-2 and XII were awful if you compare them with Japanese. I was surprised how many mistakes were made during the translation of FFVII and FFX…

Anyway I think FFXII is a great game, although I like Xenosaga episode 3 even more.

Please, avoid any spoilers if you already completed the game

Ah well, I guess those crazy japs ARE learning something from western RPG developers.

oh my god, I'm afraid to think what can they learn from fuckers like Bethesda or BioWare.

I'm just starting Shadow Hearts (not Kingdom Hearts ) and finding it to be pretty interesting and mature, even tho the gameplay is a little dull so far.

“From the New World”? Yeah, Shadow Hearts is a good JRPG but the first game had a boring gameplay.

Leo, well when I mentioned the "quality" voice acting I didn't mean the dialogue precisely, as it's mostly pedestrian shit that's only there to move the plot along or dump a bit of characterization like a ton of bricks. I was talking merely about the enjoyable quality of hearing the actors speak. It's probably only because I'm used to american voice actors, but these brit ones sound less annoying.

If FF12 has good writing or any sort of "flair" in its dialogue then I didn't catch it. The vast majority of the dialogue is inane and thankfully, easily skippable. But don't take this as some sort of knock I'm making squarely on JRPGs; I also think most CRPGs have completely skippable dialogue as well. In fact, about the only CRPGs I can remember in the last 7-8 years that had any sort of dialogue worth reading were PS:T, Arcanum and Bloodlines.