What's the deal with combatants in JRPGs declaring their special moves before they perform them? Anyone?
Is it a function of the Japanese notion of honour in battle? Or do the Japanese find it more "bad ass" for a combatant to announce exactly how he'll pummel his opponent before doing just that?
Originally Posted by Paradigm Shifter Now you're confusing the issue by comparing games and films, when you just told me that I was...?:?
Zanbatou. Very big sword used for cutting down horsemen. That's a real sword too - while it's not got the blade length of Sephiroth's sword, it's still really big. Although anyone who wants to stand in the way of a charging horse... be my guest. :)
Cultural thing again... Westerners can obviously take the idea of someone lugging two guns so big they need to be tripod mounted around without issue, but can't grasp the idea of big choppy swords.:D
You've still missed the point though. Big swords in real life serve very specific purposes: Mainly cutting down horses or breaking up units of polearm wielding soldiers. The very biggest were reserved for ceremonial purposes. All of these types of swords are represented in western film/games with a reasonable degree of realism, it is physically possible to wield a claymore. Looking at the size of swords in the FF series, most of them would weigh close to half a ton if they were made of steel. No human could wield that as a weapon.
Also, carrying around lots of guns in western films isn't as prevalent as you are suggesting. Arnie used a chain gun in predator, but dropped it when it ran out of ammo. Occasionally we see the double AK47 combo, but for the most part the average hero doesn't go for that. More often they are armed with a pair of pistols, which is a far cry from impossible to carry(ignoring the difficulty in aiming such a combo).
You can pick specific examples from either culture to contradict the premise of the article, but that isn't the general trend. Lets be honest here, most western heroes of fantasy use a shield and longsword, not a claymore.
Originally Posted by CardJoe Zanbatou. Very big sword used for cutting down horsemen. That's a real sword too - while it's not got the blade length of Sephiroth's sword, it's still really big. Although anyone who wants to stand in the way of a charging horse... be my guest. :)
Cultural thing again... Westerners can obviously take the idea of someone lugging two guns so big they need to be tripod mounted around without issue, but can't grasp the idea of big choppy swords.:D
Yes they're no-where near the length of Sephiroths sword, and don't get me started on Cloud's sword, that would be actually impossible to lift, let alone use.
And no, I don't like films where people run around with a heavy MG in each hand, but that rarely happens, if it does, it's usually explained like in T3 where he's a ridiculously strong robot.
But then again, western film makers aren't the only ones who do this, it happens in Japanese films/TV (or Japanese inspired films) like the Matrix or Tengen Toppa Gurren-Lagann where a 12 year old girl with DD boobs jumps around with a .50 cal anti-tank rifle.
Westerners can obviously take the idea of someone lugging two guns so big they need to be tripod mounted around without issue, but can't grasp the idea of big choppy swords.:D
What was wrong with Hot Shots! Part Deux, all that seemed perfectly sensible to me!?!
Again I agree with a number of people here saying that variety is a good thing, of course it is, however I think it would be nice if we saw more games developers breaking from a region's steriotypical type of game and design.
Some things do bug me about the Japanese styled games, when they try to create a "realistic" type of game, and then a sudden plot twist is justified by something ridiculous like using the 'ancient and mystical power of the black gerbil' or something else completely off the wall.
Originally Posted by Bungle Film wise I think the best cross genre piece of work which bridges East and west nicely was The matrix. There's alot of eastern influence throughout the film but it's done in a way that it's believable.
Maybe the presence of a very real and old cultural development (Martial arts) in the modern world helps the Japanese to suspend their disbelief. Certainly shows in the films where you have masters moving with supernatural speed and elegance.
wasn't the matrix originally some manga cartoon thingy or have i dreamt this up?
a cultural thing i've noticed is that in anime the characters always have really big eyes, like, half their face big. I think they are compensating for having small eyes there
I think Japanese game design is strongly influenced by the need to one-up the previous games. (-Bigger hair, bigger weapons, More boobies!) The same can be said in the erogame industry there, but that's always been freaky.:D
In America they tend to cater to the people who want 'more of the same.' -Madden # infinity, anyone?
There's also the factor of American games 'based on the movie,' while Japanese have movies and shows based on games. (Not that the same isn't mildly true in the US.) It's just that the money being thrown around to develop games in the US often comes from Hollywood, and you can get it out faster if you drop it into an existing engine.
Originally Posted by Bauul I've not heard of that game, is it any good?
Yeah, it's awesome. :D Quite old now, but still good. ;)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jordan Wise wasn't the matrix originally some manga cartoon thingy or have i dreamt this up?
"Akira" was the anime that influenced The Matrix, as far as I can remember...
...
Anyhow, to continue this debate a little further... Western films come up with justifications for wielding enormous weapons, like Arnie being a robot in the Terminator films. Or him dropping the minigun in Predator when it ran out of bullets - sensible; it's next to useless once out of ammo. Cool.
But was Sephiroth was completely human? No, he wasn't, so there is the justification right there. Cloud wasn't completely human either. I can see where you're coming from when you get a 'normal' person able to lug around huge guns or leap about like they were a kangaroo on speed, but generally there is a justification for that, too... however flimsy it might be (Magical Girl...). Magic, science, whatever... there is normally a justification somewhere in the story.
Erm, a character with a somewhat ridiculous sword, diving into a room, dodging and deflecting bullets and then chopping the shooters up .. isn't that just about every star wars RPG/FPS game ever ?
Originally Posted by DougEdey I think he means the animatrix, the "prequel" t othe matrix
I thought Sailor Moon was the prequel?
The development of a country used to be measured by it's nuke-e-yar capability. I think it could be measured more accurately with game development, as it shows a more citizen-based tech understanding. It sounds silly, but It puts North Korea back on the toilet seat.
I can see Joe's points in his article, but really, the differences all stem basically from cultural context. JRPGs draw from the mindset of their designers, which tend to be Japanese, or at least, heavily steeped in Eastern culture. Western (Euro/American) RPGs stem from the cultural mindset of its designers.
You will always see these cultural contexts brought forth in the artwork that these artists and designers produce, since they are all produced by humans. The human condition uses these contexts as the fuel for producing the artwork, and can be easily tied together. Hence why music, paintings, sculpture, architecture, and even books can be derived geographically based upon particular cultural elements located within the work, simply because those elements are parts of the designer/author/artist. Those parts are directly influenced by the people/place surrounding them. Not in a 'group-think' sense, but more in a influencing aspect. Such as how certain 'masters' can influence the artwork of their students.
But if you dissect the issue more clearly, you can identify some of the more cultural and sociological aspects. Take for instance the stylistic and design approach differences between Western and Korean MMOs. Western MMOs tend to focus on the player as an 'actor' in an experience. They are the central core, and a primary role within the story telling relationship within the game.
However, in Korean MMOs, the protagonist is more effectively, just a 'part of things'. While some focus is on the player, it's more in the manner of how the player is involved in the larger aspects of the environment. Essentially, how the player 'fits-in' into the framework of the society or function of the community which they intend via the game.
As a result of this, Korean MMOs tend to have larger interaction requirements than Western MMOs do. Guilds/Clans/Grouping is more heavily stressed, in addition to PvP and community interaction. Single-player aspects tend to be an 'afterthought', or merely a means to get the character started into the community, as opposed to a primary aspect of the design. As a result, the games tend to be extremely difficult from a 'solo' perspective, with both 'mobs' (in game monsters/antagonists) being very difficult, and often considered 'hard-core' in nature (you're expected to almost always be in a group). Fair-play doesn't necessarily mean everyone is on an equal footing, but more along the ideas that everyone starts from the same place.
This also is reflected in the community features, with most Korean MMOs having Guild/Clan/Group architectures based upon Eastern ideals. For example, Eastern ideals generally revolve around a large number of people organizing their desires and extending them onto a particular 'hero'. The group works to establish the 'hero' and help them by sacrificing their individual goals/time/player to move the individual 'hero' forward, and the group (as it is the hero's responsibility to lead the group to victory). Such can be seen in how in-game 'loot' or 'booty' is distributed, with groups, generally giving the 'hero' primary pick of the spoils, with everyone else using the cast-offs.
Western MMOs tend to be organized quite differently. They tend to establish the solo player perspective first, with the community and group features as 'add-ons', to allow the individual to better communicate with their friends. In addition, grouping is characterized by a peering function, rather than a hero-worship style. As a result, individuals in a group are given equal status, as opposed to any form or hierarchy. Grouping/Community functions tend to be functionally based, as opposed to any strict hierarchy, and general expectations is that 'everyone' pulls their own weight towards the goal.
This is also reflected in their RPGs. Western RPGs tend to revolve around the single individual 'taking on the world' (as you aptly put), as opposed to a 'group' of heros.
There are also major stylistic differences, in that the Eastern game designs tend to take a more 'fantastical' approach, as opposed to steeping themselves in 'realism' like Westerner's do.
Whether this is a true/solid/consistent preference remains to be seen, since the two cultures have so little interaction with each other. However, considering how Japanese Anime/Manga has started to become more influential in Western culture, we may finally see some of these particular bonds 'breaking'.
I tend to prefer both. The semi-realism of Western RPGs provides are much easier mechanism of attachment Since it is closer to the individuals sense of 'reality', it is easier to identify with a particular character. Not as much detailed back-story is necessary to place the character in the game universe, since much of it is similar to what one would expect normally.
However, the sheer fantastical nature of JRPGs can also be very stimulating. It's a total 'mind-break' from the reality we're so ensconced in, that it becomes a fun or fantasy-land experience. It may take a bit more effort to get the player to identify with the characters and the universe, but at the same time, that extra story-time often builds a much more complete picture of the protagonist/antagonist that the player/reader/watcher can become more involved emotionally with the character.
For example, take FFXI. Even though it was a JRPG, things were very stylized with a Western influence. However, it had a fantastical approach for the storyline and setting based upon Easter ideals, which forced you to be much more involved in the story (to understand what is going on). As a result, it was one of the few games that I actually found myself becoming emotionally 'attached' to the character, as opposed to just 'playing' it. This made the experience very satisfying, and at some points, gut-wrenching when the plots took a turn. Artful storytelling at it's best.
However, most Western influenced RPGs tend to miss these aspects and character building (e.g. who actually bothers to read the quest text in WoW), as part of their assumption that because it is based so much on 'reality', that the player will much more readily become attached. So in some aspects, the Western RPGs suffer. However, because they tend to be so much more 'reality' based, they tend to be far more 'intuitive' and require less effort on the player to get used to.
There is one final aspect which is often misunderstood or glossed over when it comes to cultural differences. Eastern cultures tend to have a cultural standpoint of 'perfection' when it comes to games/story-telling. New games will borrow from a previous version, or design from another game, and then 're-implement' that design in another manner in an attempt to 'perfect' the particular design attributes that the designer was shooting for. This is often why you see JRPGs with a billion variations of exactly the same combat style. Each one differs slightly from the other, in an attempt to produce the 'ideal' experience the designers were going for. As a result, the games tend to be very 'similar', but when put under the microscope, end up being quite different. This is their cultural design consideration coming forth, in that they will build everything else by hand, but continue to perfect a particular set of elements in every new generation.
In Western cultures, this is often seen as 'copy-catting' or pure 'sequel-ism'. Derivation #4,232 of game mechanic X. Western players see this as a minus, as opposed to an ever reaching perfection. This leads most game designers to essentially try something completely new every new game (which can often be a positive, but leaves the potential for very successful designs to be discarded). Sequels are often chided in that they may have exactly the same features or game mechanics. In addition, publishers/designers if they do produce a 'sequel', either try to re-invent the wheel which made their game great (thus destroying it), or just re-hashing the original with a few extra flashy bits (thus taking a shortcut and producing a sub-standard product).
In the end, what you see is what you get in any art form. A clustered, intermingling mass of cultural, sociological, and personal choices brought forth in the produced work.
What is interesting, would be to see what happens when we start to cross-breed these things in a mad designer fashion. What interesting and new ideas would we get when we share these differences, and would it even be possible?
on the Cross breeding games... I think every driving game should have one level that throws reality out the window. Imagine how much fun the old Burnout would be if you had loops, driveable walls, and non earth-oriented driving.:D
Originally Posted by BurningFeetMan I've never really liked bit-tech columns... They always over dramatise non-issues that no one really cares about. =\
My 2cents kthx.
true they do take it a little over the top for small or insignificant happenings but at least its somewhat amusing. :)
one thing i applaud about japanese folks is how they have moved up in terms of technological advancement so much in less than a century, yet still retain a hugh portion of their culture; working out/stretching exercises before working? that would never happen where i work... lol
Originally Posted by BurningFeetMan I've never really liked bit-tech columns... They always over dramatise non-issues that no one really cares about. =\
Originally Posted by BurningFeetMan I've never really liked bit-tech columns... They always over dramatise non-issues that no one really cares about. =\
My 2cents kthx.
We care about them :(
Me too :) . Sure there is a lot of people who enjoy reading them.
Columns written by Brett Thomas are my favourite - although he doesn't write as often(as I would like:D), he always hit the right string.
Sometimes it slightly changes my point of view, sometimes it makes me think about something I would think about of...
We've been trying to encourage more writers to sign up now to make a change. There's only so many people in the world who want to stare at our faces on the front page and we're trying to provide a platform for indie developers at the same time.
Comments 26 to 50 of 58
Maybe not very creative, but it was well balanced battleground :)
Just like bit-tech team?!? :D
Is it a function of the Japanese notion of honour in battle? Or do the Japanese find it more "bad ass" for a combatant to announce exactly how he'll pummel his opponent before doing just that?
You've still missed the point though. Big swords in real life serve very specific purposes: Mainly cutting down horses or breaking up units of polearm wielding soldiers. The very biggest were reserved for ceremonial purposes. All of these types of swords are represented in western film/games with a reasonable degree of realism, it is physically possible to wield a claymore. Looking at the size of swords in the FF series, most of them would weigh close to half a ton if they were made of steel. No human could wield that as a weapon.
Also, carrying around lots of guns in western films isn't as prevalent as you are suggesting. Arnie used a chain gun in predator, but dropped it when it ran out of ammo. Occasionally we see the double AK47 combo, but for the most part the average hero doesn't go for that. More often they are armed with a pair of pistols, which is a far cry from impossible to carry(ignoring the difficulty in aiming such a combo).
You can pick specific examples from either culture to contradict the premise of the article, but that isn't the general trend. Lets be honest here, most western heroes of fantasy use a shield and longsword, not a claymore.
I've not heard of that game, is it any good?
but in all seriousness, im just happy there's variations. i get bored easily.
Yes they're no-where near the length of Sephiroths sword, and don't get me started on Cloud's sword, that would be actually impossible to lift, let alone use.
And no, I don't like films where people run around with a heavy MG in each hand, but that rarely happens, if it does, it's usually explained like in T3 where he's a ridiculously strong robot.
But then again, western film makers aren't the only ones who do this, it happens in Japanese films/TV (or Japanese inspired films) like the Matrix or Tengen Toppa Gurren-Lagann where a 12 year old girl with DD boobs jumps around with a .50 cal anti-tank rifle.
What was wrong with Hot Shots! Part Deux, all that seemed perfectly sensible to me!?!
Again I agree with a number of people here saying that variety is a good thing, of course it is, however I think it would be nice if we saw more games developers breaking from a region's steriotypical type of game and design.
Some things do bug me about the Japanese styled games, when they try to create a "realistic" type of game, and then a sudden plot twist is justified by something ridiculous like using the 'ancient and mystical power of the black gerbil' or something else completely off the wall.
I've lived in Asia since I was 18, All China, Korea, and Japandering... I mean Japan.
As a nerd these are me findin's!
China-1.WOW 2. cs1.5 3. popokart (mario kart ripoff) 4. Korean dancing game (DDR with a keyboard)
Korea 1. Starcraft (duh) 2. WOW 3. Special force (CS ripoff) 4. Warcraft 3
Japan 1. WOW 2. Source games 3. Warcraft 3, 4. EA FIFA soccer 08 (hacked & free for online play!)
wasn't the matrix originally some manga cartoon thingy or have i dreamt this up?
a cultural thing i've noticed is that in anime the characters always have really big eyes, like, half their face big. I think they are compensating for having small eyes there
In America they tend to cater to the people who want 'more of the same.' -Madden # infinity, anyone?
There's also the factor of American games 'based on the movie,' while Japanese have movies and shows based on games. (Not that the same isn't mildly true in the US.) It's just that the money being thrown around to develop games in the US often comes from Hollywood, and you can get it out faster if you drop it into an existing engine.
...
Anyhow, to continue this debate a little further... Western films come up with justifications for wielding enormous weapons, like Arnie being a robot in the Terminator films. Or him dropping the minigun in Predator when it ran out of bullets - sensible; it's next to useless once out of ammo. Cool.
But was Sephiroth was completely human? No, he wasn't, so there is the justification right there. Cloud wasn't completely human either. I can see where you're coming from when you get a 'normal' person able to lug around huge guns or leap about like they were a kangaroo on speed, but generally there is a justification for that, too... however flimsy it might be (Magical Girl...). Magic, science, whatever... there is normally a justification somewhere in the story.
Be it Western or Japanese. :)
I think he means the animatrix, the "prequel" t othe matrix
The development of a country used to be measured by it's nuke-e-yar capability. I think it could be measured more accurately with game development, as it shows a more citizen-based tech understanding. It sounds silly, but It puts North Korea back on the toilet seat.
You will always see these cultural contexts brought forth in the artwork that these artists and designers produce, since they are all produced by humans. The human condition uses these contexts as the fuel for producing the artwork, and can be easily tied together. Hence why music, paintings, sculpture, architecture, and even books can be derived geographically based upon particular cultural elements located within the work, simply because those elements are parts of the designer/author/artist. Those parts are directly influenced by the people/place surrounding them. Not in a 'group-think' sense, but more in a influencing aspect. Such as how certain 'masters' can influence the artwork of their students.
But if you dissect the issue more clearly, you can identify some of the more cultural and sociological aspects. Take for instance the stylistic and design approach differences between Western and Korean MMOs. Western MMOs tend to focus on the player as an 'actor' in an experience. They are the central core, and a primary role within the story telling relationship within the game.
However, in Korean MMOs, the protagonist is more effectively, just a 'part of things'. While some focus is on the player, it's more in the manner of how the player is involved in the larger aspects of the environment. Essentially, how the player 'fits-in' into the framework of the society or function of the community which they intend via the game.
As a result of this, Korean MMOs tend to have larger interaction requirements than Western MMOs do. Guilds/Clans/Grouping is more heavily stressed, in addition to PvP and community interaction. Single-player aspects tend to be an 'afterthought', or merely a means to get the character started into the community, as opposed to a primary aspect of the design. As a result, the games tend to be extremely difficult from a 'solo' perspective, with both 'mobs' (in game monsters/antagonists) being very difficult, and often considered 'hard-core' in nature (you're expected to almost always be in a group). Fair-play doesn't necessarily mean everyone is on an equal footing, but more along the ideas that everyone starts from the same place.
This also is reflected in the community features, with most Korean MMOs having Guild/Clan/Group architectures based upon Eastern ideals. For example, Eastern ideals generally revolve around a large number of people organizing their desires and extending them onto a particular 'hero'. The group works to establish the 'hero' and help them by sacrificing their individual goals/time/player to move the individual 'hero' forward, and the group (as it is the hero's responsibility to lead the group to victory). Such can be seen in how in-game 'loot' or 'booty' is distributed, with groups, generally giving the 'hero' primary pick of the spoils, with everyone else using the cast-offs.
Western MMOs tend to be organized quite differently. They tend to establish the solo player perspective first, with the community and group features as 'add-ons', to allow the individual to better communicate with their friends. In addition, grouping is characterized by a peering function, rather than a hero-worship style. As a result, individuals in a group are given equal status, as opposed to any form or hierarchy. Grouping/Community functions tend to be functionally based, as opposed to any strict hierarchy, and general expectations is that 'everyone' pulls their own weight towards the goal.
This is also reflected in their RPGs. Western RPGs tend to revolve around the single individual 'taking on the world' (as you aptly put), as opposed to a 'group' of heros.
There are also major stylistic differences, in that the Eastern game designs tend to take a more 'fantastical' approach, as opposed to steeping themselves in 'realism' like Westerner's do.
Whether this is a true/solid/consistent preference remains to be seen, since the two cultures have so little interaction with each other. However, considering how Japanese Anime/Manga has started to become more influential in Western culture, we may finally see some of these particular bonds 'breaking'.
I tend to prefer both. The semi-realism of Western RPGs provides are much easier mechanism of attachment Since it is closer to the individuals sense of 'reality', it is easier to identify with a particular character. Not as much detailed back-story is necessary to place the character in the game universe, since much of it is similar to what one would expect normally.
However, the sheer fantastical nature of JRPGs can also be very stimulating. It's a total 'mind-break' from the reality we're so ensconced in, that it becomes a fun or fantasy-land experience. It may take a bit more effort to get the player to identify with the characters and the universe, but at the same time, that extra story-time often builds a much more complete picture of the protagonist/antagonist that the player/reader/watcher can become more involved emotionally with the character.
For example, take FFXI. Even though it was a JRPG, things were very stylized with a Western influence. However, it had a fantastical approach for the storyline and setting based upon Easter ideals, which forced you to be much more involved in the story (to understand what is going on). As a result, it was one of the few games that I actually found myself becoming emotionally 'attached' to the character, as opposed to just 'playing' it. This made the experience very satisfying, and at some points, gut-wrenching when the plots took a turn. Artful storytelling at it's best.
However, most Western influenced RPGs tend to miss these aspects and character building (e.g. who actually bothers to read the quest text in WoW), as part of their assumption that because it is based so much on 'reality', that the player will much more readily become attached. So in some aspects, the Western RPGs suffer. However, because they tend to be so much more 'reality' based, they tend to be far more 'intuitive' and require less effort on the player to get used to.
There is one final aspect which is often misunderstood or glossed over when it comes to cultural differences. Eastern cultures tend to have a cultural standpoint of 'perfection' when it comes to games/story-telling. New games will borrow from a previous version, or design from another game, and then 're-implement' that design in another manner in an attempt to 'perfect' the particular design attributes that the designer was shooting for. This is often why you see JRPGs with a billion variations of exactly the same combat style. Each one differs slightly from the other, in an attempt to produce the 'ideal' experience the designers were going for. As a result, the games tend to be very 'similar', but when put under the microscope, end up being quite different. This is their cultural design consideration coming forth, in that they will build everything else by hand, but continue to perfect a particular set of elements in every new generation.
In Western cultures, this is often seen as 'copy-catting' or pure 'sequel-ism'. Derivation #4,232 of game mechanic X. Western players see this as a minus, as opposed to an ever reaching perfection. This leads most game designers to essentially try something completely new every new game (which can often be a positive, but leaves the potential for very successful designs to be discarded). Sequels are often chided in that they may have exactly the same features or game mechanics. In addition, publishers/designers if they do produce a 'sequel', either try to re-invent the wheel which made their game great (thus destroying it), or just re-hashing the original with a few extra flashy bits (thus taking a shortcut and producing a sub-standard product).
In the end, what you see is what you get in any art form. A clustered, intermingling mass of cultural, sociological, and personal choices brought forth in the produced work.
What is interesting, would be to see what happens when we start to cross-breed these things in a mad designer fashion. What interesting and new ideas would we get when we share these differences, and would it even be possible?
That would be what I'd like to see...
My 2cents kthx.
true they do take it a little over the top for small or insignificant happenings but at least its somewhat amusing. :)
We care about them :(
Me too :) . Sure there is a lot of people who enjoy reading them.
Columns written by Brett Thomas are my favourite - although he doesn't write as often(as I would like:D), he always hit the right string.
Sometimes it slightly changes my point of view, sometimes it makes me think about something I would think about of...