Why they both (to various degrees) succeeded in my opinion has little to do with the things I just mentioned. I generally found the combat in Xenosaga 3 to be somewhat irritating and after a while repetitive and bland. The immortal skill mechanic in Lost Odyssey was nicely explained in the context of the game, making it seem natural rather than shoehorned, but otherwise could have been provided with extra item slots. Yet I'd take either game over Final Fantasy 13 as an example of what a good JRPG should be. Why is this? Because both Xenosaga 3 (and the series overall) and Lost Odyssey got the core tenets right: they had stories you could become lost in, and they had characters about which you cared.
I'm not going to go into detail about the story and characters here, because that would takes pages and pages and this is a subjective analysis in any case. The point is that when I played Xenosaga and Lost Odyssey, I was invested in the story and characters.
As much as I hated Shion's constant utterance of "KOS-MOS!", Xenosaga's characters felt real and sympathetic. They were individuals with colored pasts and checkered personalities, and pitted up against villains who, despite committing great acts of evil, were much the same as your protagonists, only farther along the spectrum of irrationality. And as much as I was confused by the ridiculously complex Jungian-Christian story, it was creative and admiringly detailed.
Lost Odyssey's characters were successful in a similar manner. While more black and white than Xenosaga's, they have enough history both with each other and with other people and places in the world that you can't help but be on their side. The story is simple at its core but is told well and remains strong throughout the game.
Sterling's last sentence in the article reads:
"If anything, JRPG makers need to stop attempting to be 'innovative' and concentrate simply on making a game that doesn't completely suck."I agree that the fundamental problem I have with JRPGs like FF13 is that in general, it sucks. Where I disagree is the idea that innovation is what causes the suck. As imperfect as the combat is - and believe me, I am in no way arguing that FF13's combat was fantastic - the battles are far and away the most entertaining thing in the game. That is the problem. In a JRPG, the most entertaining thing in the game should be the story, followed by the characters. Combat and other systems follow. The story in FF13 is bland and uninteresting. It is basically on the same level of quality as the very first Final Fantasy, but does not have the same excuse of being a groundbreaking step in video games. Nowadays, you have to do better. At the very least, you have to be on the same level as your previous output, and most other Final Fantasy games outclass 13's story.
FF13's characters are in an even worse place than its story. I actually skipped some cinematic scenes on my play-through because the dialogue was so bad and I didn't care enough about what the characters had to say at that particular moment. Therein lies the tell-tale sign that FF13 sucks. I was so far from being invested in the characters that I wanted to get back to the combat system that Jim Sterling so vehemently dislikes.
Japanese RPG studios need to realize one thing: no matter how much you innovate in developing game systems, the heart of an RPG will always be your story and the characters that operate within its confines. If one is weak, the game will be tolerable but not great. If both are weak, the game shouldn't even be labeled an RPG. If you have voice acting, the dialogue needs to be strong enough that the characters avoid sounding like single-faceted idiots (read: Vanille, Snow) or generally uninteresting grunters (read: Lightning, Hope).
Look, Square-Enix (and other JRPG makers). Go play Uncharted 2. See that right there? That's a great story, and great characters, and great voice acting. Use that as your standard, and base an RPG around that standard. Or if you don't require a more modern example...go play FF6 or Chrono Trigger again.
