I find it interesting that you use the term "narrow-minded" several times during this article, considering that seems to be exactly what your view of Japanese gaming is. Several times you claim to speak of all Japanese games when, in reality, you are only speaking about some of the quirkier, more niche titles. You seem to overlook series like Resident Evil and Street Fighter, which have progressed their respective genres heavily and had vast mainstream success, when calling out all Japanese games as archaic.

To clarify, I used the phrase "narrow-minded" a grand total of one time.

I will concede the fact that both Resident Evil as well as Street Fighter have experienced "vast mainstream success", but how exactly have each of those progressed their respective genres? Street Fighter 4's new art style? Resident Evil 5? Give me a break! I'd believe you if you were to cite the leap to Resident Evil 4, but not all that much has happened in the franchise since then to be honest.

 It seems like you gave up reading my article half way through, and the second you saw the phrase "narrow-minded", you just had to write your comment.

Besides, did you not get the sense that I was referring primarily to Japanese role-playing games? I guess I'll have to make that explicitly clear next time.

And I think you, and much of the BitMob community will agree with me that many of the JRPGs that come out in this day and age generally experiment less than most Western RPGs in terms of story-telling and gameplay mechanics.

Different strokes for different folks, I suppose.

I can't say much about JRPGs as I haven't played one since the 20th century, but as a resident of Japan I can assure you that Japan makes TV shows, movies and games for Japanese customers first. I'm sure that Square Enix knows the series is popular abroad, but in no way does that affect their creative process.

As a consumer, I definitely "forgive" Japanese products for their shortcomings because I am aware that their media is in no way made with me in mind. However, there is only so much I am willing to overlook before I lose interest - hence why I no longer play JRPGs.

So did I love Resident Evil 5 despite its one-dimensional plot and acting? Yes, more so than I would a US-developed game with similar stupidity. I'm not saying that Japanese games don't have to evolve, because they do, but I definitely view them differently because I know they are produced by people who are very, very different than me.

"Many JRPGs generally experiment less than most Western RPGs in terms of story-telling and gameplay mechanics." (paraphrased slightly)

I disagree. When you look at fighting games, the control schemes are often very similar, whether it's swords and sashes or fist-to-fist, characters, environments, pacing, and attacks are often the only changes between franchise to franchise. FPS's suffer from the very same monotony. Sure, they've got different weapons, different maps and different pacing, but on a fundamental level, there's little that separates Quake, Call of Duty and Doom.

But FFXIII has players following a strict story for much of the game, alternating between characters, and slowly introducing the gamer to new systems. Design is striking, realistic, and in large parts, Western. Compare this to Magna Carta II, which has a very objective approach, more akin to an MMO than an RPG, and an almost caricature-like art style which really sets it apart from others. And there aren't a great deal of similarities between Enchanted Arms, Lost Odyssey and Kingdom Under Fire: Circle of Doom, especially when compared to those between more popular Western games.

I loved Persona 4 and Shenmue 2 because they come from an alien (to me) culture. I forgave their shortcomings because they were unique and had appealing writing, not because I wanted something Japanese. I loved and forgave the flaws of Mass Effect and Fallout 3 similarly.

The exploration of a new cultural setting is the important bit to me, but it can be real or fictional.

I am with Alex on Persona and Shenmue, but do wish I didn't have to forgive weaknesses. There were really obvious areas in both these games that could have been polished to make them more player friendly. I am noticing the same thing with Yakuza 3. It is really good, but also has things like stiff animation, unclear direction and other elements that could have been polished out.

Sandy Morley, I don't mean at all to be rude, but let me bring to your attention how obviously flawed your argument is:

""Many JRPGs generally experiment less than most Western RPGs in terms of story-telling and gameplay mechanics." (paraphrased slightly)

I disagree. When you look at fighting games, the control schemes are often very similar, whether it's swords and sashes or fist-to-fist, characters, environments, pacing, and attacks are often the only changes between franchise to franchise. FPS's suffer from the very same monotony. Sure, they've got different weapons, different maps and different pacing, but on a fundamental level, there's little that separates Quake, Call of Duty and Doom."

Did you not get the part about RPGs?

It's okay, I forgive you.

Alex Martin, with regards to what you said, "I loved Persona 4 and Shenmue 2 because they come from an alien (to me) culture. I forgave their shortcomings because they were unique and had appealing writing, not because I wanted something Japanese. I loved and forgave the flaws of Mass Effect and Fallout 3 similarly.", don't you agree that Western standards are shaped by Western games, rather than Japanese games? Do you remember a time where that wasn't the case? Maybe the 90s, when Nintendo and Sega ruled the gaming space, and therefore shaped gamers' expectations as to what might constitute a "quality" game?

As Western game developers have ran with the lessons learned from Japanese game design, and refined, and improved their techniques over the years, while Japanese games, and more specifically, Japanese RPGs seem to have in relative terms, gone by the wayside in terms of popularity, as they have become increasingly more reliant on convention. So to a Western consumer, a Western RPG is simply that much more attractive, knowing that the experience will likely be more streamlined, battling bosses will no longer be a concern, and dialogue and story will be generally more understandable and involving, and happily, far less melodramatic.

With being said, by a Western gamer's perspective in this day and age, do you not get the sense that the story issues one may experience are both far less as noticeable, and detract less from one's overall enjoyment of the given game? Whereas in Japanese games, I've found myself getting hung up by countless issues in terms of difficulty and the lack of intuitive gameplay.

And as I close, am I alone in thinking there's some sort of intangible quality Japanese games generally (and certainly not always) boast, for which I have often been attracted to Japanese games over Western ones?

That'll teach me to read before replying, eh?

Either way, JRPG's got a lot of stick for not progressing as much as Western games, but whole genres stagnate completely, and don't get any of the bad press. Fighting games still haven't come out of the arcades, but how many times do you see people huddling around a Street Fighter booth these days?