East vs West in video game world

[2H-Dragon]

Originally Posted by WanderingKnight

It's not unfair, and it's not about memorizing. Yes, there is some memorizing involved, but that goes more along the lines of "keep yourself on the right in this area" and not on the exact pattern, since it would make no sense at all. Games like Mushihime-sama, aptly called "bullet hell" games, are all about using your tiny-hitbox-ship to avoid seemingly impossible barrages of bullets. You can't expect to beat those games on the first go--that would be kind of silly.

It's not about "fairness"... though of course, it depends on what you expect from a game. His whole point in the article is that you can't expect an arcade game to play like a console one.

Yeah, but I'm just saying where not really in that bad of a situation. If you want a hard game you can get hard game easy. Rather then back in the games. Where you where almost forced to play hard games.

Do I miss the arcade? Yes, but I prefer the situation now compared to then.

[crazysjd89]

It's been said, but I think games more focused on story (RPGs) are more popular in Japan, while games with more action and putting you in there (First-person shooters) are more popular in the west.

Also, it's not as uncommon in Japan to have very popular single game developers (Comiket comes to mind). While I can think of a few in Japan, I can't think of any outside of it.

As for what I prefer, I've liked most any game that is good since I was young. Specifically now, I'm pretty bias to like most games, since I am working to becoming a game developer myself.

Also, as someone who has a bad memory and also plays Touhou obsessively, it's comes more naturally the more you play it. But there is also quite a bit of skill needed, especially on harder difficulties, because sometimes there might not be a pattern at all, and you just have to dodge it.

[Irenicus]

Well hello massive generalizations.

As a gamer of Western games that play a lot of niche games (yes, goddammit we exist), this constant undertone that all the Western videogaming scene has to offer is FPS is getting seriously on my nerves.

Don't get me wrong, in general, with some blockbuster exceptions, FPS sells better than others (except maybe RTS -- and obviously discounting the entirely different mechanics of MMO's), but there's a lot more to Western gaming than that. Some of the most amazing games anyone could ever play are indie efforts, or targeted very specifically at smaller, different (usually self-styled "mature") markets.

So yeah, shove it with that "Western gamers lack attention span" shite; it really is a shallow argument.

Then again, I'm probably more interested in the divisions and trends within Western gaming than I am with this East vs. West concept, one that blatantly ignores the uniqueness of Japan -- and I can say that with confidence, since I've actually experienced gaming in other Asian countries firsthand, and back then [when PC was still big in the West too at least], PC gaming stood side-by-side with Japanese console games on equal footing.

[Ledgem]

Originally Posted by Sety

Theres nothing particularly innovating about better physics, shinier graphics as they're a natural progression of technology. Now adding to the story and extra gameplay elements is something great but could we do it from a view where I don't struggle to see a dog gnawing me to death on my leg? Or doesn't try killing me with migrains from overuse of blurring, dizziness and bullet time?

Sounds more like you have gripes against the controls of standard FPS games more than anything else. You're also totally discarding better physics and shinier graphics simply because it's a natural progression of technology. I totally disagree - people are able to do more thanks to advances in technology, but it isn't like faster processors automatically mean that games will look better or incorporate physics.

I said it before, we all have different criteria for what innovation and features of a game genre are. If you feel that an FPS is just about running around shooting stuff, things like advanced physics and AI won't be a new feature to you - it'll just be a progression of technology. Similarly, if someone feels that an RPG is just about choosing things from a menu, they won't be able to appreciate things like better cutscenes, alternate endings, or being able to see different equipment - after all, that's just due to a natural progression of technology too, right?

Well, we're all gamers here, so we can appreciate gaming. Not sure about the rest of you, but occasionally I play old games - I love it for the nostalgia factor (especially the good ones), but I really love realizing and appreciating how far all of these games have come.

[Benoit]

the Final Fantasy series is often taken as an example of innovation within the JRPG genre

It's often taken as such, but it really isn't that much of an innovative series, though it does have its moments. There's nothing innovative between FFII and FFVI. FFVII is not innovative, and neither are FFIX and FFX.

[TurinTurambar200]

Originally Posted by Benoit

It's often taken as such, but it really isn't that much of an innovative series, though it does have its moments. There's nothing innovative between FFII and FFVI. FFVII is not innovative, and neither are FFIX and FFX.

Actually, while the innovation of the latter FF games can be up for debate until who knows, I have to point out the different direction FFIV took the series. FFIV was the first one to finally direct the series away from simply a job based, combat focused game, and made the idea of individual characters being the focus of the game instead of classes. The idea of "story telling" that many want to praise the later FF games for, imo, were born with FFIV. While some would argue that FFII already implemented that idea, it really wasn't well recieved, as seen by how FFIII receded into familiar grounds.

[asaqe]

Also another game that doesnt do well in America is mecha, not only you got a bunch of Mecha Haters in science fiction, but there is also the western mech crowd who demands realism in their games. Games with fancy explosions and stylish moves wont cut it for mecha fans here in the West. Mechasssault was mostly shunned by the fans here due to it was really unrealistic and MW just caters to the Davion crowd.

[-RK-]

Originally Posted by Jays

Going back to Final Fantasy XII, the thing I enjoyed most, was the gameplay, I loved the Gambit system, because of the way you could setup everything pre battle, and then like a smart tactitian analyze and adjust accordingly. However the gameplay felt very smooth, even if the battles took ages to end.

I absolutely hated the combat system in FFXII. You gotta be kidding me. The gambit system was ok and took away some of the monotony but if more games come out like that, I flat out wont play it, it was that bad.

As was mentioned the Storyline played out much to slow in FFXII. That was also a concern but due to my lack of interest in the combat system i couldnt bring myself to grind or to do extra sidequests. Its funny... the beginning of the game was so good but somewhere in the middle it all got muddled and ruined it.

[Kaioshin Sama]

Originally Posted by asaqe

Also another game that doesnt do well in America is mecha, not only you got a bunch of Mecha Haters in science fiction, but there is also the western mech crowd who demands realism in their games. Games with fancy explosions and stylish moves wont cut it for mecha fans here in the West. Mechasssault was mostly shunned by the fans here due to it was really unrealistic and MW just caters to the Davion crowd.

Which is why Front Mission 4 sells for like 10 bucks now and is a bargain bin title. Also why the amazing Front Mission 5 never made it out here despite Square normally bringing much of their library across seas nowadays. I still remembering going into my local EB and staring in disbelief at Front Mission 4 and seeing a $19.99 pricetage on something that was almost brand new. It was being treated like less than shovelware for some reason. I also heard it was one of Square's lowest selling games in ever in North America so I can only assume that most American's really do hate mecha among other pieces of evidence.

[mandarb916]

Not for all genres, but
Japanese games = character development
US games = no character development

I'm sorry, but there isn't enough character development in US games to get attached to the character, then get drawn into the game, which is somewhat the design of a good chunk of Japanese games.

Japanese games generally are part of a media mix...they result in not just games, but manga, anime, music, dramaCD's, etc so there's more ways than one for a gamer to enjoy a world that the game is a part of. Also, Japanese games can bring gamers in via other media as well...a good number of people, as an example, were drawn to Ar Tonelico because of the vocal soundtrack (which I might is one of the best...Tonelico II...I've ever heard). It just feels like western games rely solely (sp?) on graphics to sell

/shrug

[asaqe]

Originally Posted by Kaioshin_Sama

Which is why Front Mission 4 sells for like 10 bucks now and is a bargain bin title. Also why the amazing Front Mission 5 never made it out here despite Square normally bringing much of their library across seas nowadays. I still remembering going into my local EB and staring in disbelief at Front Mission 4 and seeing a $19.99 pricetage on something that was almost brand new. It was being treated like less than shovelware for some reason. I also heard it was one of Square's lowest selling games in ever in North America so I can only assume that most American's really do hate mecha among other pieces of evidence.

To be honest, people only knew about FM during 3, they didnt know the backplot except for translated roms.

[Js2756]

Has anyone ever considered that FPS' are not popular in Japan because you need big boxes to play them on?

Perfectly serious here. FPS' have always pushed the upper bounds of graphics in PCs, which generally means that for the people who really want to "appreciate" the FPS, that means a big desktop machine. Most serious gamers who play FPS' don't play them on laptops. If you play on console, that probably means the X-Box or 360, which really aren't small machines built with small Japanese residences in mind.

On a corollary, PCs in general, are not anywhere near as popular as they are in the West. Most of what we use PCs for in North America (aside from gaming), is handled by smaller mobile devices over in Japan (such as phones).

There may be other considerations that factor into why certain genres play well in certain geographic regions rather than personal preferences.

Feel free to shoot this down, as it is mainly conjecture.

[tripperazn]

Originally Posted by Js2756

On a corollary, PCs in general, are not anywhere near as popular as they are in the West. Most of what we use PCs for in North America (aside from gaming), is handled by smaller mobile devices over in Japan (such as phones).

So true, wi-fi via cellphone in Asia is so much more common (and accessible). Which also explains why their cellphones kick so much ass.

Also note that Akibahara is not originally an anime stronghold, but originally a huge electronics district. It just so happens that it's mostly otaku who are technically proficient enough to actually appreciate computer hardware and whatnot. Most people don't need a high powered desktop (or even a desktop at all).

[WanderingKnight]

Well, PCs in Japan are not considered as a gaming platform in the first place... True, they're used by eroge makers, but eroges aren't very popular to begin with...

[tripperazn]

Originally Posted by WanderingKnight

Well, PCs in Japan are not considered as a gaming platform in the first place... True, they're used by eroge makers, but eroges aren't very popular to begin with...

Check the recommended PC specs for most eroge. They are so pitifully low that it doesn't matter if your PC is 8 years old. This is in contrast to the FPS requirements that really only fit the high-end PCs of the current generation. They're completely unplayable on most laptops not made for mobile gaming, since they require a good graphics card.

[Ledgem]

Originally Posted by Js2756

Feel free to shoot this down, as it is mainly conjecture.

The Playstation 2 and Playstation 3 aren't significantly smaller than the Xbox or Xbox 360. Nintendo's systems have generally been smaller, though.

[WanderingKnight]

The Playstation 2 and Playstation 3 aren't significantly smaller than the Xbox or Xbox 360. Nintendo's systems have generally been smaller, though.

The 360 is small (but that didn't go in without taking its toll... mainly the RROD ), but the original Xbox was huge. I do believe the main problem Japanese people had with the design was the (absurdly huge) controller, though.

I'm still amazed at how much the console industry owes to the original PSX gamepad. Basically everything after the hideous Dreamcast, Xbox and Gamecube gamepads went back to the original Dualshock design, even the traditional Wii controller.

[Benoit]

I'm still amazed at how much the console industry owes to the original PSX gamepad.

You mean the SNES gamepad, as the PSX gamepad is mostly a copy of it.

the hideous Dreamcast, Xbox and Gamecube gamepads

Speak for yourself. I admit that the Dreamcast pad wasn't perfect, most notably its analog pad position, but it was in no way hideous. The GameCube pad, however, is almost perfect. It's quite comfy, and most importantly, has the analog pad on the primary position!

12 years later and we still have these damned Dual Shock gamepads with two analog pads on the bottom and a D-pad on the primary position! For game consoles that mainly have 3D games, this is quite the annoyance. At least the Dreamcast's analog pad was up, which is more natural to reach when holding a controller than down.

[Js2756]

Originally Posted by Ledgem

The Playstation 2 and Playstation 3 aren't significantly smaller than the Xbox or Xbox 360. Nintendo's systems have generally been smaller, though.

True, but the original PS2 was the first console that was designed so that it could also be placed sideways to save space.

[Z3120]

Originally Posted by Benoit

You mean the SNES gamepad, as the PSX gamepad is mostly a copy of it.

Speak for yourself. I admit that the Dreamcast pad wasn't perfect, most notably its analog pad position, but it was in no way hideous. The GameCube pad, however, is almost perfect. It's quite comfy, and most importantly, has the analog pad on the primary position!

12 years later and we still have these damned Dual Shock gamepads with two analog pads on the bottom and a D-pad on the primary position! For game consoles that mainly have 3D games, this is quite the annoyance. At least the Dreamcast's analog pad was up, which is more natural to reach when holding a controller than down.

It's a matter of preference and individual taste it seems. I found the Gamecube controller absolutely horrible as it reminded me and played like a worser version of a Dreamcast controller except smaller and even more uncomfortable. The DC controller wasn't to my liking either as I never liked the D-Pad and the bumps on the analog at the top left, but it played nicely for me in like Power Stone and Soul Calibur. Marvel Vs Capcom 2 was a different story though.

Now the PS2 on the other hand. Nice rest and easy to reach buttons.

Hated the original Xbox controller as that was absolutely huge and I easily had cramps for any Xbox game from Dead or Alive 2 to Halo quickly, but the 360's controller on the other hand is a much better to me than the DC and the original Xbox controller. D-Pad is still pretty bad for the 360 to mem but it's still a major improvement to me compared to the DC's D-Pad, which felt uncomfortable.