Fallout: New Vegas "Mocking JRPGs" Advertisement

[.Pixote.]

I’m curious why Bethesda would use a negative marketing campaign in Japan, when you read through the List of best-selling video games it’s astonishing how few games made in the U.S. actually sell in Japan. This is probably the most exaggerated example but –

*Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell (3 million: 2.4 million in US, 600,000 in Europe, 5,449 in Japan)

…those 5,449 were probably American ex-pats living there, but this must be considered a serious issue for English language game developers, considering that Japan is the second largest market outside of the U.S. Having the yanks provoke the Japanese market like this could provoke a hostile response…only time will tell.

 

[Per]

*Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell (3 million: 2.4 million in US, 600,000 in Europe, 5,449 in Japan)

It means 5,449 million.

 

[Dionysus]

I’m curious why Bethesda would use a negative marketing campaign in Japan, when you read through the List of best-selling video games it’s astonishing how few games made in the U.S. actually sell in Japan. This is probably the most exaggerated example but –

*Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell (3 million: 2.4 million in US, 600,000 in Europe, 5,449 in Japan)

…those 5,449 were probably American ex-pats living there, but this must be considered a serious issue for English language game developers, considering that Japan is the second largest market outside of the U.S. Having the yanks provoke the Japanese market like this could provoke a hostile response…only time will tell.

Bethesda actually does OK there (for an American dev). And the audience for sandboxy RPGs is probably pretty different from the audience for strategy games with cut-scenes.

 

[Stanislao Moulinsky]

Well, in the same way someone could argue that playing a JRPG skipping the cutscenes, and thus without understanding the story or knowing where they have to go next for example, would be a self-imposed challenge; others could call both things being an idiot. What you want to call it is up to you, but at its root, the implication is the same: you are willingly missing content that is an integral part of the game.

Well, no. They are different things. Playing without VATS makes things simply a little bit harder. It's an option. The cutscenes in a JRPG instead are mandatory and if you skip them you ruin the whole experience.

A more fitting example is comparing VATS to summons. They are an important part of the gameplay but you can play without them (well, at least in the FF I played...).

Oh, by the way... is it even possible to finish RE1 only with the knife? (that is, without shooting even once)

Yep. Every old-style RE game can be finished only with the knife.

 

[LionXavier]

Well, no. They are different things.

And I don't disagree with you. They're indeed different: one is repetitive and only features combat and the other is varied and often features dialogue. This doesn't prevent the fact that, at their core, they're the same thing though: non-playable cinematics integrated into a game.

Playing without VATS makes things simply a little bit harder. It's an option.

Ever since you can skip JRPGs' cutscenes at your will by pressing a button you can't stop it from being called an option too.

The cutscenes in a JRPG instead are mandatory and if you skip them you ruin the whole experience.

And I'm sure that I can find more than one player who would consider avoiding VATS to ruin their whole experience in Fallout 3.

A more fitting example is comparing VATS to summons. They are an important part of the gameplay but you can play without them (well, at least in the FF I played...).

I'm not familiar with those "summons" (In fact since I know games like Fallout 1/2 I'm not familiar with JRPGs anymore), but if they imply a great lengt of non-playable time spent in watching something performing that frecuently interrupts the game, then yes, it's comparable to VATS. And to the other cutscenes for that matter.

 

[UncannyGarlic]

I'm not familiar with those "summons" (In fact since I know games like Fallout 1/2 I'm not familiar with JRPGs anymore), but if they imply a great lengt of non-playable time spent in watching something performing that frecuently interrupts the game, then yes, it's comparable to VATS. And to the other cutscenes for that matter.

Chances are that he's referring to a Final Fantasy game between FFVII and FFX, as all three had summoning sequences of varying lengths, which is closer to VATS than the story cutscenes.

 

[Stanislao Moulinsky]

Ever since you can skip JRPGs' cutscenes at your will by pressing a button you can't stop it from being called an option too.

Come on. You know what I mean.

And I'm sure that I can find more than one player who would consider avoiding VATS to ruin their whole experience in Fallout 3.

Er...so? Cutscenes are mandatory, VATS is activated if you want to. Since JRPGs are heavy on story you "can't" skip them if you want to enjoy it, instead if you don't like VATS you can choose to not use it and still enjoy the game to its fullest. VATS is (way too) useful but it's not like you can't play without it.

I'm not familiar with those "summons" (In fact since I know games like Fallout 1/2 I'm not familiar with JRPGs anymore), but if they imply a great lengt of non-playable time spent in watching something performing that frecuently interrupts the game, then yes, it's comparable to VATS. And to the other cutscenes for that matter.

An old example.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdZefzfRt4o
40 seconds every time you use this one. Too long? You can choose to not use it.

 

[UncannyGarlic]

Er...so? Cutscenes are mandatory, VATS is activated if you want to. Since JRPGs are heavy on story you "can't" skip them if you want to enjoy it, instead if you don't like VATS you can choose to not use it and still enjoy the game to its fullest. VATS is (way too) useful but it's not like you can't play without it.

It's not like being a JRPG means that the game will have bad combat so that's not entirely true. The difference is that skipping cutscenes means that you miss out on the plot of the game (it's a question of storytelling preference) while not using VATS means that you're kneecapping yourself when it comes to gameplay. Summons are a better comparison and FFX was the only one to offer shorted summon sequences (it really should have offered the ability to skip or turn them off). Slow-mo in VATS needs to be optional just like summon animations. You do have to give JRPGs a point for making cutscenes skippable, enhancing replay value and, for some games, reducing frustration upon dying and trying again.

Not sure why there is all this bashing of cutscenes, they are an effective method for the format. The problem is the lack of interactivity.

I'd take an hour of cutscenes over an hour of VATS any day but again, it's not a good comparison.

 

[Stanislao Moulinsky]

I'd take an hour of cutscenes over an hour of VATS any day but again, it's not a good comparison.

This.

Now I don't even remember why we ended up comparing long story-related cutscenes with short gameplay-related cutscenes.

 

[LionXavier]

Chances are that he's referring to a Final Fantasy game between FFVII and FFX, as all three had summoning sequences of varying lengths, which is closer to VATS than the story cutscenes.

Well, then both VATS, summons and cutscenes are objects of the "games becoming something you watch" criticism, which was my point since the beginning.

Er...so? Cutscenes are mandatory,

Again, if they are skippable at will then they are not, by definition, mandatory. No matter how you want to put it.

VATS is activated if you want to.

But once activated you have to watch it till the end. JRPGs' cutscenes are activated automatically, but you can skip then whenever you want. One thing for the other.

Since JRPGs are heavy on story you "can't" skip them if you want to enjoy it,

Uh... are you telling other people how they have to enjoy their games?

instead if you don't like VATS you can choose to not use it and still enjoy the game to its fullest.

No, you aren't enjoying the game to its fullest; you are avoiding using one feature that is part of the game.

VATS is (way too) useful but it's not like you can't play without it.

That doesn't stop it from being an important component of the game, a component that implies unskippable non-playable slow-motion cinematics.

Not sure why there is all this bashing of cutscenes, they are an effective method for the format. The problem is the lack of interactivity.

The only bashig of them comes from the advertisement that is object of this thread. A stupid bashing when is from someone it also can be applied to.

I'd take an hour of cutscenes over an hour of VATS any day but again, it's not a good comparison.

It's a good comparison in regard of the "When did games become something that you watch?" sentence.

Seriously, Stanislao Moulinsky, there's no point in carrying this discussion any further. I've already agreed with you that they have their differences; in the same way, you should agree with me that they both are parts integrated in their respective games, imply non-playable cinematics and can be object of the "games becoming something you watch" criticism, which has been my one and only point the entire time.

 

[Lexx]

How can you guys even compare cutscenes with a combat pause function...

 

[LionXavier]

How can you guys even compare cutscenes with a combat pause function...

I can when after that pause a cutscene-like cinematic is displayed.

 

[Stanislao Moulinsky]

Again, if they are skippable at will then they are not, by definition, mandatory. No matter how you want to put it.

Uh... are you telling other people how they have to enjoy their games?

Again, I'm sure you know what I mean. The first time you play you don't skip cutscenes if you want to enjoy the game because you don't know if what's shown is important or not.

in the same way, you should agree with me that they both are parts integrated in their respective games, imply non-playable cinematics and can be object of the "games becoming something you watch" criticism, which has been my one and only point the entire time.

Sure, but the difference of their nature IMO isn't a secondary one.

But meh. Let's end this debate.

 

[SkuLL]

Bottom line is, NO ONE wants to watch the same 5+ second animation of a head popping and one eye flying out of the socket with every headshot once they've seen it 200+ times.

It's way too long and can't be skipped. And 'you don't have to use VATS' is not an answer to that problem.

 

[LionXavier]

Again, I'm sure you know what I mean. The first time you play you don't skip cutscenes if you want to enjoy the game because you don't know if what's shown is important or not.

Of course I know what you mean. But I'd like you to understand me too: we can argue about people's motivations for skipping game content all we want, but none of those make VATS "better" than cutscenes regarding the "games becoming something you watch" criticism because skipping VATS is somehow more legitimate than skipping cutscenes.

Sure, but the difference of their nature IMO isn't a secondary one.

And I don't find any reason why I should totally disagree with you here.