>>137
Ahh...no. I certainly didn't post 136. I figured it was probably 133/135 or 130 trying to discredit me rather than answer any of the questions I've posed towards aRPG's.
to recap:
#47: "...all of these (regarding list in post #36) WapPGs, since they all play almost exactly the same..."
--Discredited. The list provided in post #36 feature a tremendous amount of jRPG's that do not play similarly.
#51: "The only significant company in Japan is Square. All of their games have a similar feel, and all of their Japanese competitors copy from them"
--Discredited. The list provided in post #53 includes 14 signifigant Japanese companies who publish RPG's not similar to Square RPG's both in Japan and America. Further, I am confident that most people will agree that Secret of Mana does not "feel" like Final Fantasy IV in play mechanics...as an example.
#55: "Random Encounters"
--True and False. Many jRPG's feature random encounters. Many don't. Those titles that don't include R.E., but are not exclusive to these titles, were brought up in post #63.
#57: "The only major games to come out of it (Japan) now are Dragon Quest (#) and Final Fantasy (#)."
--Discredited. See post #36 again. Also see #58 & #63, specifically regarding the difference between a jRPG sequel every 2-3 years vs an aRPG expansion every year or less.
After #64 it turns into a cluster-fuck of idiocy, though #68 does try to take the moral high ground by defaming both aRPG's and jRPG's in different ways. However, before this the posts defending jRPG's also made several statements against aRPG's, which have never been defended against in this thread (and were only re-inforced/confirmed by #64). Is it because these statements against aRPG's are true? And if not, prove it.