Is there anyone else here who prefers Japanese video games over American ones?

[simbob4000]

Winback maybe, but Metal Gear Solid 2(2001), the game those mechanics were really introduced in full came out a year before the first Splinter Cell(2002) so no on that

The cover mechanics that third person shooters use today are nothing at all like what's in MGS2. That post you replied to is in relation to the idea that:

Between Shinji Mikami and Hideki Kamiya, Japan practically invented modern third person shooters.

And that just isn't true. The over-the-shoulder view is from Splinter Cell, and cover mechanics went a totally different way than Metal Gear Solid. Metal Gear Solid 2 also only lets you look around cover at wall edges, it doesn't let you look over the top of them; even by MGS4 you couldn't do this.

[simbob4000]

...
Yes, Fallout 1, 2 and 3 and Planescape Torment and Half Life 2 and Grim Fandango and Portal and Baldurs Gate and the Witcher titles and the Civilization series and Bioshock and Diablo 1, 2, 3 and Starcraft 1and 2 and world of warcraft and GTA and System shock 1 and 2 and Deus Ex and the total war games and dishonored and Dragon Age and the Batman games and ...well, i can stop there.
No personality and mechanically void, but pretty looking.
Perhaps they should have more stories that begin with amnesiac heros who don't speak or begin with villages burning down?

From Grim Fandango to Telltale visual novels. From original Fallouts to terrible FPS mechanics Fallout 3. From the System Shock games to BioShock. From CRPGs to half-assed third rate "why am I not just playing Devil May Cry" Dragon Age games. From the first Arkham game to whatever the hell they're trying do with those. Please western developers, stop trying to innovate, you're going the wrong way.

Are the Civilization games getting better? I haven't played a new PC one since the early 2000s, and those weren't better than Civ2; and it sounds like they just get worse. Have they made one since better than Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri?

[Shawn Hopkins]

From Grim Fandango to Telltale visual novels. From original Fallouts to terrible FPS mechanics Fallout 3. From the System Shock games to BioShock. From CRPGs to half-assed third rate "why am I not just playing Devil May Cry" Dragon Age games. From the first Arkham game to whatever the hell they're trying do with those. Please western developers, stop trying to innovate, you're going the wrong way.

Are the Civilization games getting better? I haven't played a new PC one since the early 2000s, and those weren't better than Civ2; and it sounds like they just get worse. Have they made one since better than Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri?

Those almost all seem like they're getting better to me, or are apples to oranges comparisons like Grim Fandango to Telltale. Compare that to Broken Age, at least. And Fallout 3 is so different it's also not an instructive comparison.

[simbob4000]

Those almost all seem like they're getting better to me, or are apples to oranges comparisons like Grim Fandango to Telltale. Compare that to Broken Age, at least. And Fallout 3 is so different it's also not an instructive comparison.

They aren't getting better. But in what way do they seem to be getting better to you?

I haven't played Broken Age, but I've played Telltales new take on the Adventure game that tons of people go crazy over for some reason, and they aren't adventure games. Those Telltale game fail at what they're trying to do gameplay wise, the weird thing is seeing people eat them up like they're actually doing what they're sold as doing. The Dragon Age games sure aren't an improvement the CRPGs of the past, (and not even all the great ones, just BioWares) and gameplay wise they're atrocious; combat wise they're an utter failure...and these games are extremely combat focused.

Fallout 3 can still be compared. While Bethesda did just turn it into post-apocalyptic Elder Scrolls, they are still trying to do story stuff like Fallout, they're trying to do choices and consequences; and in those things they fail utterly. As does there new take on the series combat. It's a first person shooter, a very bad FPS, and it's got a really bad free hit system that's mean to invoke the turn based system...they say anyways. The original Fallouts sure did turn based tactical combat a hell of a lot better than Fallout 3 does FPS. Even visually the original Fallout games had better combat. Fallout 3 doesn't have death animations like those games, they have crappy looking models that pop apart like a crash dummy toy when anything hits them, no matter what hits them. One of the many unintentionally funny things about Fallout 3 is how single bullets just push characters heads and limbs off their body in the most stupid ways. I'm not even sure why they bought the Fallout series. They clearly don't want to make Fallout games, and they clearly don't care about the setting. I'm not sure why they didn't just save the money and make Elder Scrolls: 2277. Where they in love with a few armor designs, some faction names, and the title? It's not like Fallout was some huge series everyone knew about.

[HunterDoodle]

Japan gave us DMC3 special Edition
The west gave us DmC

Japan wins.
I didn't even need the 17 cup rule here, I was done in 1

[Shawn Hopkins]

They aren't getting better. But in what way do they seem to be getting better to you?

I haven't played Broken Age, but I've played Telltales new take on the Adventure game that tons of people go crazy over for some reason, and they aren't adventure games. Those Telltale game fail at what they're trying to do gameplay wise, the weird thing is seeing people eat them up like they're actually doing what they're sold as doing. The Dragon Age games sure aren't an improvement the CRPGs of the past, (and not even all the great ones, just BioWares) and gameplay wise they're atrocious; combat wise they're an utter failure...and these games are extremely combat focused.

Fallout 3 can still be compared. While Bethesda did just turn it into post-apocalyptic Elder Scrolls, they are still trying to do story stuff like Fallout, they're trying to do choices and consequences; and in those things they fail utterly. As does there new take on the series combat. It's a first person shooter, a very bad FPS, and it's got a really bad free hit system that's mean to invoke the turn based system...they say anyways. The original Fallouts sure did turn based tactical combat a hell of a lot better than Fallout 3 does FPS. Even visually the original Fallout games had better combat. Fallout 3 doesn't have death animations like those games, they have crappy looking models that pop apart like a crash dummy toy when anything hits them, no matter what hits them. One of the many unintentionally funny things about Fallout 3 is how single bullets just push characters heads and limbs off their body in the most stupid ways. I'm not even sure why they bought the Fallout series. They clearly don't want to make Fallout games, and they clearly don't care about the setting. I'm not sure why they didn't just save the money and make Elder Scrolls: 2277. Where they in love with a few armor designs, some faction names, and the title? It's not like Fallout was some huge series everyone knew about.

I've been playing games for 30 years, as a serious gamer and collector, and they're better than ever. They get more complex and engaging every year. The rise of indie gaming has allowed developers to take risks that would never have happened in the old corporate structures. I understand the temptation to look at things through a lens of nostalgia and assume things are getting worse and worse, but that hasn't been my experience.

Broken Age is a better comparison because Telltale's games are more like interactive stories. Broken Age is literally Tim Schafer's first adventure game since Grim Fandango.

I love Dragon Age. I think Origins is actually better than the original Baldur's Gate (and I love Baldur's Gate). I think Inquisition suffers from too much open-world bloat, but it's still a very fine game. When the biggest problem with your game is that it feels unstructured because there's too much to do, that's definitely a first-world problem. And Dragon Age is definitely better than most of the CRPGs of the past. There are enough bad old CRPGs to fill a dumpster.

Fallout 3 isn't really meant to be played as an FPS. That's just an ammo-inefficient option for easily beaten trash mobs. If you're playing on a decent difficulty (normal is actually easy in this game) then you need to use VATs for the tougher battles.

Fallout 3 does feel a bit like a Fallout pastiche or parody in a story sense. But Fallout: New Vegas is by some of the original developers, it's a real Fallout experience through and through.

I think Fallout was more popular than you think.

[Shawn Hopkins]

And to be fair and to get back on topic, if you play this nostalgia game Japan comes off even worse. Compare Chrono Trigger and Final Fantasy VI to Final Fantasy XIII. Compare Konami's classics to Konami's mobile garbage. Look at what's happened to Sonic as a cautionary tale. Think about Mega Man and try not to cry.

Nintendo has stayed gold, though.

[simbob4000]

And to be fair and to get back on topic, if you play this nostalgia game Japan comes off even worse. Compare Chrono Trigger and Final Fantasy VI to Final Fantasy XIII. Compare Konami's classics to Konami's mobile garbage. Look at what's happened to Sonic as a cautionary tale. Think about Mega Man and try not to cry.

Nintendo has stayed gold, though.

They don't, because they were, and are, still making stuff like Vanquish, Bayonetta, Dragon's Dogma, Dark Souls, Bloodborne, Binary Domain, the first Dead Rising, and other stuff.

[Shawn Hopkins]

They don't, because they were, and are, still making stuff like Vanquish, Bayonetta, Dragon's Dogma, Dark Souls, Bloodborne, Binary Domain, the first Dead Rising, and other stuff.

Well, those are new IPs so I'm not sure what you're getting at. If you allowed new Western IPs like The Last of Us, it would be a different story, too. But if I wasn't clear, I'm saying the nostalgia game is pointless. It's too easy to cherrypick good examples from one era and bad ones from the other.

I don't think you can count the first Dead Rising as a modern game, seeing as it's about ten years old. The other two are made by Canadians.

Also, Vanquish has amazing gameplay, but one of the worst stories I've ever seen in a game. it's like the developer wanted to make a game without story, was forced to put one in by marketing, and intentionally created the most off-putting characters and generic plot possible out of spite.

Bayonetta has good gameplay, but brings us back to my personal preference for games not sexed up with creepy fetish stuff.

As an aside, I don't "get" Binary Domain. I see people rave about it but I found it clunky and couldn't even finish it.

[simbob4000]

I've been playing games for 30 years, as a serious gamer and collector, and they're better than ever. They get more complex and engaging every year. The rise of indie gaming has allowed developers to take risks that would never have happened in the old corporate structures. I understand the temptation to look at things through a lens of nostalgia and assume things are getting worse and worse, but that hasn't been my experience.

It's not nostalgia, most games are worse now than before, especially when we're talking about these big modern games coming out of the west. Games aren't getting more complex...not when it comes to the actual game part. Yeah, they're lots of complex graphical stuff, but FPSers have been getting dumber with simpler stages for years now. As a whole they're probably less engaging too. I'm guessing you mean they're engaging because of their stories or something, but video games are about the game part. I don't care about seeing some developers crappy movie, if I want a traditional narrative I'll go to a media that does that far better; like books and movies. Im not going to suffer through some terrible stealth game that's at best an average third person shooter so I can watch it's majestic zombie story that full of hamfisted graffiti narrative bits like some kind of half-assed Left4Dead or Portal.

Funnily enough I wrote this post before seeing your newest one

Broken Age is a better comparison because Telltale's games are more like interactive stories. Broken Age is literally Tim Schafer's first adventure game since Grim Fandango.

Yeah, I know who he is and everything. But Grim Fandango is a good example of where adventure games as a whole were, to where they've gone with Telltales stupidness.

I love Dragon Age. I think Origins is actually better than the original Baldur's Gate (and I love Baldur's Gate). I think Inquisition suffers from too much open-world bloat, but it's still a very fine game. When the biggest problem with your game is that it feels unstructured because there's too much to do, that's definitely a first-world problem. And Dragon Age is definitely better than most of the CRPGs of the past. There are enough bad old CRPGs to fill a dumpster.

I think saying any of them are better than Baldur's Gate is crazy, and I'm not the biggest Baldur's Gate fan. The biggest problem of the Dragon Age games, at least since the second game, is they're trying to make action games; and as they keep showing, they have no business making action games. There's lots of other problems with the games too, but the biggest is the type of game they're now trying to make, and how bad they are at making it. The combat being so horrible wouldn't be such a problem if they didn't have you engaging in it all the time, and if they hadn't dumbed down everything else so much.

I'm really having a hard time thinking of any it's better than that I've actually played.

Fallout 3 isn't really meant to be played as an FPS. That's just an ammo-inefficient option for easily beaten trash mobs. If you're playing on a decent difficulty (normal is actually easy in this game) then you need to use VATs for the tougher battles.

Fallout 3 does feel a bit like a Fallout pastiche or parody in a story sense. But Fallout: New Vegas is by some of the original developers, it's a real Fallout experience through and through.

I think Fallout was more popular than you think.

Fallout 3 is very clearly meant to be played as a first person shooter. The game is Oblivion with guns, it's meant to be played in real time just like Oblivion is...only they messed up the shooting mechanics so badly that you need that terrible VATS system the game has to hit stuff. If you were meant to play in VATS than they probably would have actually thought about making it not so broken, and your AC points would likely effect realtime action too. VATS is more like a special meter that builds up so you can get free hits in a FPS.

Yeah, NV is also a far better game. It's just too bad they had to work from the template that was Fallout 3. Thankfully they turned Bethesda's style of game into something playable. Fallout 3 feels like it was made by people that only know it from looking at it's Wikipedia page...or maybe just a half remembrance of looking at the boxes in the store.

Fallout was not more popular than I think, I know, I've been playing it since it came out. It had a very hardcore fanbase, but not a big one. And you would think they would know that group wouldn't really like what they did to it.

[simbob4000]

Well, those are new IPs so I'm not sure what you're getting at. If you allowed new Western IPs like The Last of Us, it would be a different story, too. But if I wasn't clear, I'm saying the nostalgia game is pointless. It's too easy to cherrypick good examples from one era and bad ones from the other.

I wasn't make a point about old-to-new within a series in the post you replied to. You said something about it, but that's not what I was really talking about.

The Last of Us doesn't do western developers any favors. It's bad gameplay with nice presentation, and it's not as good of a mix of that as their own Uncharted 2.

I don't think you can count the first Dead Rising as a modern game, seeing as it's about ten years old. The other two are made by Canadians.

I know the later two are developed by Canadians, that's why I only said something about the first one. Also because the first one is the best one. I'm going to allow it, given that this pretty much started with:

Western games are pretty much the same as they've been since the 90s. That is, no personality, mechanically void, but just really pretty looking.

Also, Vanquish has amazing gameplay, but one of the worst stories I've ever seen in a game. it's like the developer wanted to make a game without story, was forced to put one in by marketing, and intentionally created the most off-putting characters and generic plot possible out of spite.

No, it's like the developer was making a video game. The story in Vanquish is better than most of the try hard stuff you find in modern games. It's better than the self-serious stuff BioWare in Mass Effect, and it sure as hell plays better. Looks better too.

Bayonetta has good gameplay, but brings us back to my personal preference for games not sexed up with creepy fetish stuff.

Good gameplay is an understatement.

As an aside, I don't "get" Binary Domain. I see people rave about it but I found it clunky and couldn't even finish it.

What's to get? It's a great third person shooter. It both feels and looks great to shoot things in it. It's got really good gameplay, the enemies react to how you shoot them in a few different ways that effects how you play, and you can't just sit in cover all day like most other cover based third person shooters today. It's also got really good boss battles.

[Immortal Weapon]

What I think about Japanese games is what I think when I see the Vita RPG selection at Gamestop.

"No thanks, I'm not a pervert."

I know sex sells, but as the Japanese market has shrunk it's followed the lead of anime and leaned on fan service too hard. Games where you rip clothes off women, or punish criminal girls, or make harems, or watch boobs jiggle take up a huge part of the output. And even stuff that's not solely aimed at ferocious maturbators generally has at least some content to attract them (look at Quiet in The new Metal Gear, I don't care how they justify it in game, they made a statue of it with squishy boobs).

Heck, it's not even stuff I personally find sexy. Since it often involves women that look or act really young (hello Paz!) it's actually super squicky. Western games use sex, too, The Witcher is a notable example, but at least that stuff sticks to softcore Cinemax cliches and doesn't go in weird fetish directions.

That only applies to a certain range of Japanese games of course. Games aimed at kids or general audiences, including most of what Nintendo does (except for its obsession with Zero Suit Samus) don't have these problems.

You screwing up. What your seeing are niche games for a now niche handheld. Even the Vita has it's share of the diverse Japanese titles. I like how you fail to mention all the hunting games on it.

[Xero Kaiser]

Japan gave us DMC3 special Edition
The west gave us DmC

Japan also gave us DMC2.

[simbob4000]

Japan also gave us DMC2.

But the west gave us Dragon Age 2 and Heavenly Sword.

[Immortal Weapon]

But the west gave us Dragon Age 2 and Heavenly Sword.

And Yaiba: Ninja Gaiden Z