Talk:Cultural differences in role-playing video games
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Supremacy?
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)
There is no need for that. "Best" is a relative concept, and answering this question will necessarily be a racist and ethnocentric statement. Avoid trouble and leave it as it is. --143.106.1.146 (talk) 16:42, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] "Western?"
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).
[edit] Finish the Sentence
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)
Bump. -Anonymous
- 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)Solberg
[edit] Console RPG & Computer RPG split
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)Solberg
Admittedly I only briefly scanned the article, but it didn't seem to define the terms CRPG and cRPG. These should be defined in the beginning of the article. --Xyzzyplugh 14:26, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
Good point, I will add wikilinks to the top so that these terms will be drawn to their respective articles (where definitions and nomenclature are described). -- Solberg 20:12, 12 July 2006 (UTC)Solberg
I think one of the main problems with this is that some people see the terms cRPG and CRPG to only mean what type of platform the game is released for, and to distinguish them from PnP RPGs. Such people exclusively use "Western" and "Japanese" to refer to the two different style genres. I would argue that the latter distinction is more accurate, since both types have been common on consoles. This article starts with the Western/Japanese distinction, but then somewhat confusingly goes on to use CRPG and cRPG to describe the distinction. --The Yar 19:48, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
- 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)
[edit] Sourcing
I don't see anything particularly inaccurate with this article, but it badly needs sources. Ace of Sevens 02:30, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] CRPG's Vs. cRPG's: Original Research?
Looking through the article, and its links, they reference computer RPG's as CRPG's and console RPG's as cRPG's. Not only does this seem confusing, I'm suspecting original research here. While I have seen CRPG refer to "Computer Role Playing Game" I've never seen the term "cRPG" used in any gaming publication and searching Google for "cRPG" mostly gets hits refering to "CRPG" with a few forum posting refering to "cRPG". Does anyone have any legit sources for the term "cRPG"? --Mitaphane talk 21:19, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- The onyl place I've ever seen the term "cRPG" is here and a few other Wikipedia pages. Ace of Sevens 21:41, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- So what do we do about it? I changed the lead section in the article to reflect the more accurate East Asian/Console Western/Computer headings, but that's just the tip of the iceberg. Outside of the acronyms CRPG/cRPG, there are a ton of CVG articles that refer to "console RPGs" and "computer RPGs". I think, ideally, East Asian/Western labels should be used as they are no longer exclusive to one platform(e.g. Diablo is on the PSOne & FF VII is on the PC). Plus it would be much easier for non-gamers reading the wikipedia to understand. --Mitaphane talk 22:36, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- Maybe if we can find the first Wikipedians to work out this CRPG/cRPG thing (like whoever created the redirect page), we can ask what their sources are for the cRPG acronym. I also have not seen this in wide use outside Wikipedia. -- Solberg 07:27, 7 August 2006 (UTC)Solberg
- RmR was the to use the term "cRPG" in the article Console role-playing game as far as I can tell. He also was the first to alter the CRPG article to reflect the "cRPG Vs. CRPG" state it is currently in. Given the nature of his first edit on the CRPG I suspect it was a neologism he was pushing. I sent him a message regarding the issue to see if he had any sources to clear this up.
- Maybe if we can find the first Wikipedians to work out this CRPG/cRPG thing (like whoever created the redirect page), we can ask what their sources are for the cRPG acronym. I also have not seen this in wide use outside Wikipedia. -- Solberg 07:27, 7 August 2006 (UTC)Solberg
- So what do we do about it? I changed the lead section in the article to reflect the more accurate East Asian/Console Western/Computer headings, but that's just the tip of the iceberg. Outside of the acronyms CRPG/cRPG, there are a ton of CVG articles that refer to "console RPGs" and "computer RPGs". I think, ideally, East Asian/Western labels should be used as they are no longer exclusive to one platform(e.g. Diablo is on the PSOne & FF VII is on the PC). Plus it would be much easier for non-gamers reading the wikipedia to understand. --Mitaphane talk 22:36, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
- If he doesn't response or doesn't have any sources, I suggest we go to the effort of getting rid of all the wikipedia CVG references to "cRPG" & "CRPG" in lieu of the more descriptive western/east asian RPGs. As daunting as it may be, it will make the CVG articles a lot less confusing. --Mitaphane talk 09:05, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- The thing is, historically, most of the gameplay design differences (not with things like visuals and characters) were due to the unique memory and control hardware restraints against both PCs and consoles. Although this is arguable, I think most people saw it as a console vs. PC thing rather than an East vs. West thing, which due to market circumstances was also true. The console vs. PC thing is even more evident now, as most major Western PC RPGs are being designed for console-then-PC, rather than the individual tracks they used to be on. --SevereTireDamage 05:02, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- I agree completely. So whether or not to use Console/Computer or East Asian/Western is the smaller of the issues here; it's the prescriptive vs descriptive language thing rehashed. In some ways both sets of terms have their accuracy. I'm all for using the terms interchangably. I guess the important thing is consistancy so that it's not confusing for the reader.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- The other, more important, issue is the acronyms cRPG & CRPG. JRPG,WRPG seem to be valid with listing on the free dictionary here and here and on Gamespot here and here. A search on gamespot for "CRPG" ends up here, they do not seem to make the distinction between "cRPG" and "CRPG". The Free Dictionary seems to make no difference either "CRPG" goes to a page that says it could refer to Console or Computer RPGs.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- As I see it, cRPG & CRPG are a fan distinctions, created so that the reader instantaneously knows whether it is a console or computer RPG. This is important when the format is short forum posts as their is no context. However, Wikipedia is not a fan forum. Most of the time on the Wikipedia acronyms are used in context; RPG could refer "Rocket Propelled Grenade" or "Role Playing Game" depending on the topic(e.g whether we are talking D&D or military conflicts). Unfortunately, context is a bit trickier in this case since CRPG lies in the same topic of video gaming. In this case, the context has to be the article (e.g. whether we are talking about Final Fantasy or Baldur's Gate). Given this, I say the appropriate thing to do is we use "CRPG" universally and link to either Console_role-playing_game or Computer_role-playing_game depending on the right context.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- If anyone has any differing thoughts or insights please reply. --Mitaphane talk 14:48, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
- The east/West thing is what's used by most actual publications. It certainly would be appropriate to explain how these were shaped by their usual platforms, but these days, you have a lot of Western RPGs on the consoles and the console/computer terminology was never in wide use, so it would be inappropriate to use it for the name of the subgenre. Ace of Sevens 17:30, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
- If anyone has any differing thoughts or insights please reply. --Mitaphane talk 14:48, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
I'm not arguing for the little c vs. big C thing, that does seem to have originated from the need to distinguish the two in a single computer role-playing game article before the split earlier this year. However, certainly "computer RPG" and "console RPG" terms have been used to distinguish the platforms for a long time. For instance, there's this History of Console RPGs (dated June 1999) on GameSpot back in its videogames.com days, though it uses "PC RPG" instead of "CRPG" to talk about computer games, which was also commonly used. Square Enix self-describes Valkyrie Profile as a "console RPG"[1]. I'm sure similar finds of "computer RPG" are also available. But I may be confused about what you're saying here. --SevereTireDamage 18:54, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
What a mess. The question isn't whether we should rip out the cRPG acronym, since it appears to be a neologism, but what exactly to replace it with. Should we just simply use the entire phrase "console role-playing game?" It would appear that using JRPG as a substitute for cRPG is a tad misleading especially given recent trends like cross-platform CRPGs. I was tempted to say we should use both the (East/West; Console/Computer) distinctions in this article, but use the correct one in whatever was being compared/contrasted at a given instant (for example, we may say "console role-playing games tend to be more linear than computer role-playing games", presuming that the difference is due to architectural rather than cultural reasons. The problem is that this will probably lead to lots of assumptions and more original research or POV material. It could also be argued, with some plausibility, that this could not be the case as Chrono Trigger was relatively nonlinear for its time, and it ran on an SNES. Regarding the lack of citations in this article, btw, it seems that the problem is that a lot of the information is considered common knowledge among fans. P.S. Looking at this article, I just thought of something, maybe we could just use a Western CRPG v.s. Japanese console RPG distinction, which is more accurate. Western cRPG(sorry, this neologism is too convenient) and Japanese CRPGs tend to disobey commonly perceived trends. Not completely my idea, someone seems to have been driving at a similar point already into the intro paragraphs with statements like "A fundamental difference between Western CRPGs and Japanese cRPGs is the way the games’ stories are structured." Since Western CRPGs and Japanese cRPGs are the two main branches, I think it is fair that a comparison article should focus on these two subtypes rather than on the other two variants (Eastern CRPG and Western cRPG). The two minor variants can be pointed out in small tangential examples. Does anyone think this idea will work? We're going to have to go through a lot of Wikipedia's digital RPG pages changing the terminology in either case. -- Solberg 20:53, 8 August 2006 (UTC)Solberg
- I think replacing with JRPG would actually be appropriate. The title of the article is "cultural differences" not "platform differences." Western RPGs on consoles (such as Elder Scrolls) still largely follow Western conventions and the PC ports of the Final Fantasy games still follow Eastern conventions. For that matter, Korean RPGs are almost entirely on PC and follow Eastern conventions. The traditional associations with platforms and how those influenced the mechanics should be explained, of course. Overall, this article is about stylstic differences between North America/Europe and East Asia, though, not between consoles and PCs. Ace of Sevens 01:56, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
- I think you're missing the point from earlier, which is that we can't be certain what can be attributed to cultural differences as opposed to architectural differences. To create a CRPG v.s. JRPG distinction just seems, intuitively, absurd, maybe it's just me. We'd be pitting a distinct architecture's tradition v.s. a culture's tradition. Still, I'd like to hear what everyone else thinks. -- Solberg 04:09, 9 August 2006 (UTC)Solberg
- It wouldn't be CRPG vs JRPG. It woudl be WRPG vs JRPG. I realize some of the convetions grew out of the platforms, but but as the platforms changed, the conventions stayed. Overall, it's the culture. Besides, things like not following D&D rules had nothing to do with the limitations of the NES and everythign to do with culture. Ace of Sevens 06:32, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
- I think you're missing the point from earlier, which is that we can't be certain what can be attributed to cultural differences as opposed to architectural differences. To create a CRPG v.s. JRPG distinction just seems, intuitively, absurd, maybe it's just me. We'd be pitting a distinct architecture's tradition v.s. a culture's tradition. Still, I'd like to hear what everyone else thinks. -- Solberg 04:09, 9 August 2006 (UTC)Solberg
I've never heard the term CRPG/cRPG on any gaming cite. Just on wikipedia. RPGamer isn't called CRPGamer. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 23:34, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
- Although I agree with the point you're trying to make, the argument you're using doesn't work because the term RPG itself refers to classical role-playing games, thereby making the site's name incorrect in either case. -- Solberg 04:09, 9 August 2006 (UTC)Solberg
- Postscript: Dude, I just checked and your example is even more wrong than I thought, that site is dedicated to both computer AND console role-playing games, so even if the acronym cRPG exists there's no way it'd be called either CRPGamer or cRPGamer. -- Solberg 04:11, 9 August 2006 (UTC)Solberg
[edit] Plan of Action
- 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)
[edit] Fantasy/sci-fi
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)
[edit] Original reseach
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)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Fallout 01.jpg
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)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Fallout 01.jpg
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)
[edit] Japanese gamers vs western gamers
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)
[edit] MMORPGs
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)
[edit] All wrong!!
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)
- 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)
- 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)
[edit] Curiousity
Does this type of topic (Eastern vs Western) apply to other video game genres? KyuuA4 (talk) 19:39, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- 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)
[edit] Citing Sources
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)
- 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)