Final Fantasy XIII: Just what is a ‘role-playing game’?

Non-Japanese reviews for SquareEnix’s Final Fantasy XIII are trickling in, and it seems there’s a disconnect between what Japanese gamers and Western gamers expect from their RPG’s…so much so, that FFXIII director Motomu Toriyama has weighed-in on the issue:

“We think many reviewers are looking at Final Fantasy XIII from a western point of view,” says Toriyama in a recent issue of Xbox World 360. “When you look at most Western RPGs, they just dump you in a big open world, and let you do whatever you like…” Toriyama adds that it “becomes very difficult to tell a compelling story when you’re given that much freedom”.

I’ve given this issue a lot of thought over the last few years, and discussed it with friends on more than one occasion: just what constitutes a ‘role-playing game’? My approach to this question comes from 30+ years spent rolling dice and poring over character sheets that would make a tax-preparer’s eyes glaze over. Without going into a lengthy discussion about the history of role-playing games and the intersection between the tabletop and computer / console varieties, I’d say that role-playing games are about once central concept: choice.

Often, when game developers describe their offerings as ‘RPG’s', what they really present is some other kind of game with RPG trappings retro-fitted to generate an aura of freedom or complexity. Allowing me to harvest points with which to buy upgrades for my character is fun, but not inherent to what makes an RPG tick – even if those upgrades change the way I play the game.

There are obviously differences between what Japanese and Westerners expect from a role-playing experience. By and large, Japanese gamers want to be pulled along by a narrative whereas Westerners (more specifically, Americans) want to create their own narrative – or at least have a say in the narrative.

Bethesda’s Elder Scrolls games and recent Fallout 3 are prime examples of the kind of open-ended gameplay that Toriyama laments. I spent upwards of 200 hours roaming the countryside in Morrowind, involving myself in a myriad of side-quests and pursuing goals of my own creation (I need a complete collection of every piece of avaiable armor in my house!) – and never once involved myself in the game’s main storyline. There are some who may think this is marginally insane, but to this day Morrowind remains one of the most memorable gameplay experiences I’ve ever had.

If good stories are all that are required for a game to be considered a great RPG, then Uncharted 2 is an amazing RPG. But it’s not, not in any meaningful way (I say this because I think there’s a viable argument to be made that any kind of entertainment which allows you to assume control the protagonist, in effect pretending you are the protagonist, is a role-playing game. Even Super Mario Brothers).

In all fairness, nobody has yet crafted the videogame equivalent of real roleplaying, i.e. getting together with friends on a weekend and crafting really fun stories about imaginary people and places. Even MMO’s, which ought to be the best implementation of this kind of gameplay, sorely lack for actual roleplaying. There’s very little game-supported RP to be had in most MMO’s. World of Warcraft is, at it’s heart, still a game about killing and looting stuff. Any roleplaying to be had there is outside the game’s mechanics. EVE Online, with it’s strong focus on hands-off admin reinforcement, is closer to the ideal. Player-driven activites are almost always more interesting than content handed down by the developers.

To get back to my original point, choice matters. Or should matter, if you’re going to call yourself an RPG. Final Fantasy XIII and other games of its’ ilk can be fun (Lost Odyssey stands out as a particularly good recent example), but I’m not so sure I’d call them role-playing games. There’s too much force feeding going on.

Think about what Toriyama said. …”[it] becomes very difficult to tell a compelling story when you’re given that much freedom.” This raises some interesting questions about how game developers go about delivering narrative in games. Japanese RPG’s typically give players very little freedom in how the story turns out, or indeed what happens when they’re not pursuing the main story. You can roam about town looking for people with exclamation points over their heads hoping for a quest to appear or grind the outback for XP, but other than that you’re basically milling about before heading towards the next story checkpoint.

On the other hand, check out this quest from the aforementioned Fallout 3 (spoilers if you haven’t played the game).

There are a number of ways to complete this quest (which you can read about here if you’re interested) – most of these involve siding with one character or another, helping both, helping neither…or do what I did – namely sneak up on each of them, put a live grenade in their pocket, and walk away with all of their armor.

I’m not suggesting that Square move Final Fantasy in this direction (although I think it would be awesome to put a live grenade in Sephiroth’s pocket). What Japanese RPG’s do, they do extremely well. But frankly, if someone is going to hold your hand that much in a game, why call it an RPG?