I'm an hour into Earthbound and the combat is super uninteresting. Hit, hit, hit, heal, repeat...

I'm an hour into Earthbound and the combat is super uninteresting. Hit, hit, hit, heal, repeat. Oh I got a hypnosis spell, except it didn't work on the enemy and boss I tried it on so that's a waste of a turn and PP. Hit, hit, hit, hit, heal. I like the writing and QoL things like the magic butterfly and enemies dying instantly if you're a lot stronger than them, but it's still a slog.

My question is this: Why do JRPGs get a free pass on gameplay? Earthbound is a very highly regarded game, so why is the gameplay so dull and repetitive?

If you want to throw some deflection like "but it, it, it gets better once you're XX amount of hours in" then the game should just start there. Action games don't get free passes for being trash for the first hours so JRPGs shouldn't either. If you'll say "but the point is just to absorb the world/art/music/etc" then why have combat in there at all instead of some other form of gameplay, or no gameplay at all?

prepare for
>going around in circles with "earthbound actually sux lolz you should play game y instead, now there's a real jrpg"

seems like you caught on, it's a meme game. only liked for its le quirky humour and le atmosphere. if that doesn't grab you it doesn't have enough going for it gameplay wise to keep you interested. it's legacy only lives on because its a Nintendo game and was featured in smash bros. it's a 5/10, nothing more

That's why a lot of games in the earthbound style, clearly taking inspiration from it, just become full on adventure games. The combat to me always was not directly annoying but never great. It's a very standard jrpg in the original dragon quest style.

Mother 3 improves on gameplay significantly but also sadly loses some of the road trip adventure style of arriving in a new town and wandering around that made EB stand out so much.

Mother 3 was more interesting ith its rhytm bonuses.

It's old and outdated now but it's combat was standard for the time. I didnt mind it too much and the plot/atmosphere is worth the grind if you're interested in it.

Because the story is actually good, the visuals are good, the music is good, plus it's a RPG. You know what you're signing up for when you play one.

Action games have a main focus on action, if you fuck up the action you fuck up the game. RPGs focus on "roleplaying" or story telling, world building, etc.

Just because people know have the attention spans of gnats and can't enjoy stuff like this anymore doesn't make it bad.

it's like any other old turn based jrpg, do you have a problem with old final fantasy combat as well? I do like the rolling hp meter system though, even if it worked better in mother 3. with all the games ""inspired"" by earthbound, I'm surprised I haven't seen anything copy that system

Because itoi is a hack who can't design games.

The rhythm factor was decent, but it was the only thing they actually added, and some songs were shit to use it with unless you had Duster to figure out what the game wanted you to do. On top of that, the actual bonus damage was mediocre unless you got almost, if not all, 16 hits.
Everything else the same old shit, mechanics-wise. Running was also a pain in the ass. What the fuck is so goddamn bad about holding a button down or even just toggling, Itoi, you sack of shit? No, instead you do some dumbass startup and then have to deal with shitty turning. At least it's slightly better than having it tied to a store-bought item in a game with a very limited inventory or having a bike that becomes useless once you get a new ally.

>it's like any other old turn based jrpg, do you have a problem with old final fantasy combat as well?
I think that's OP's actual problem.
>I do like the rolling hp meter system though, even if it worked better in mother 3. with all the games ""inspired"" by earthbound, I'm surprised I haven't seen anything copy that system
Probably too hard for them to program or figure out.

yeah that's kinda what I figured, since most INSPIRED BY EARTHBOUND games are indiepixel shit that just steal the art style and clumsily try to be "quirky" and fail miserably. actually coding a rolling hp meter is far beyond their drag and drop coding skills

JRPG gameplay is meant for people with higher attention spans and intelligence

You are doing it wrong
In JRPGs you need to think of battles as puzzles
You have to finish the battle as fast as possible and taking as little damage as possible while conserving as many resources (items and magic points) as possible
Battles are not supposed to be "fun" in on themselves they add to the world and narrative with the enemy placement and character abilities

If you want fun combat you are in the wrong genre

In the first 5 minutes I got a looping text box forcing me to say Yes to rescuing my obese neighbor's brother, so it's already a failure when it comes to roleplaying. x)
Don't reply to this, we all know Japanese games hate player agency and it's just a meme. Wizardry, etc.

Hold on a minute, there are people who actually think Final Fantasy 1 has good combat? I just, what? How?

>higher attention spans
>higher
lol'd

I'd rather file my taxes.

And thats fine go play something else then
Personally I love JRPGs combat, DQ is my favorite game series.
If you dont get it stop playing

It's like that for the rest of the game unfortunately. Game is pretty bad itself, mechanically. It's an old DQ style except it's even worse because there is also tedious item micro management, lots of boring farming etc. Combat don't require much strategy either unlike dragon quest. You're forced to level up.
Also the dungeon design is very bland at best. Irritating at worst. (Hello the fucking dungeon item labyrinth.)

Everything else is great except the game itself. M3 improved a ton in the mechanics and it feels more modern and less archaic.

>My question is this: Why do RPGs get a free pass on gameplay?
fixed

But thou must.

That's the second stupidest fucking thing I ever read, after "man-spreading", that is.

>I don't like JRPGs
>I'm playing a JRPG
>Why don't i like it

Sup Forums should be eradicated off the face of the earth.

It gets fun when you get a second party member, and then exponentially better when you get Jeff.
Also the first area in the game is the hardest, people usually grind to level 8 I think before progressing.
You never have to grind after that.

It IS a great game OP, you just have to work for it a little bit.

>tfw I recognize this scene
WHY THE FUCK IS THAT CLERIC HAPPY
THOSE TWO KIDS KILLED THEMSELVES

The start is rough since Ness is on his own and has only a little PSI and PP, not much you can do other than bash things. Once you get PSI Rockin and Paula with Freeze and Fire it becomes a lot better.

...

Some JRPGs have really good gameplay, like Shin Megami Tensei IV: Apocalypse.
Most of the genre is liked mainly for the atmosphere and the feeling of adventure though

I feel like you gotta like JRPGs to like Earthbound. Do you like JRPGs?

?Why do JRPGs get a free pass on gameplay?
they don't
play a real-time-with-pause dnd game that people praise and you'll see an identically slow start
a fucking 6 second wait between every single attack, it's horrible

> Once you get PSI Rockin and Paula with Freeze and Fire it becomes a lot faster.
Fixed.

>JRPGs have boring and repetitive combat
whoa, it's almost like you knew what you were getting into

>any restriction in player choice at all means the game fails at roleplaying
Just popping into this thread to say no, and kill yourself

Earthbound isn't about role playing in the sense that you're thinking of. It's just about appreciating the mesmerizing and intoxicating atmosphere of the world, if you're not into that you probably won't like it as obviously it's no gam play tour de force

I also got two hours into Mother 1 a few months ago. I'll probably end up dumping this game too and trying Mother 3. I doubt it'll click though.

The thing is I have enjoyed multiple JRPGs, to completion:
Paper Mario 1 and 2: I was a kid when I played these, 2 at launch, but I liked the art, the simplicity of having damage always being single digit numbers, and the badge system is neat. Stats aren't just +2% STR, they're very noticable differences. Very neat and simple
Barkley Gaiden: Really good writing, also intentionally easy. Yes this is a JRPG.
FF7: The art makes me very nostalgic. I think the aesthetic completely carries it. The combat is simple but the real time thing (Cranked to the fastest it can go) is just tolerable enough with the materia and limit systems.

I don't want recommendations. I've heard them all. Got a list.

learn to read

The game gets good once you reach Winters

none of those are turn based jrpgs in the traditional sense you retard

>replying to joke post seriously

earthbound has garbage gameplay, its a very boring game. it completely fails when compared to other JRPGs of the era which had both good plot and good gameplay, such as Chrono Trigger.

No way!

Seriously, just 1 hour OP? Is this your first RPG ever? None of them ever get interesting until you're at least 5 hours deep

Those JRPGs you mentioned are newer than EB. It sucks you don't like the gameplay but those have the advantage of the genre learning from its mistakes or evolving the genre

It's garbage, I played until the first companion and nothing improved

dude the first zone you fight like punk kids on skateboards and like you get abducted by aliens and shit.

People like earthbound because its japanese as fuck and its really....abstract. The whole game has this bizarre sense of solemnity mixed with bizarre humor. Its unique and has some great music. Its also one of the first games to have metahumor about the tropes from games. Thats why people like earthbound. its also old as fuck like have some respect like 22 people made this in a sweaty garage in japan because they just fucking loved video games.

>My 1994 dragon quest clone has dated gameplay! Why isn't it fun!?!?
shocker

There is literally nothing original about JRPGs. In the good old days Japanese were not at the edge of technology, they were making cheap knockoffs of American designs (like China does now).

One such case is Dragon Quest and subsequently ALL JRPGs. In 1983 Yuji Horii and Koichi Nakamura attended a computer show in San Francisco, where they first play Wizardry. They love it, so when they go back to Japan they buy it and decide to create a game like it.

Now, the way most people tell the story paints them under a positive light. This is absolute bollocks. Basically, they ripped off Wizardry’s system, but they dumbed it down (some people claim this to be a stroke of genius, FFS) and Ultima’s overhead view. They pretty much ripped everything off Wizardry and Ultima III (especially that): combat system, random encounters, maps, you name it. The difference was the graphics style, which was created by Akira-the cliché of Anime crapness-Toriyama. All in all a substandard, cheap, knockoff.

All JRPGs since then cloned a clone. But computer RPGs moved significantly since 1983 (a date the Japanese are still stuck too). Garriott introduced morality and a keyword based conversation system in the next Ultima instalment and removed random encounters. Computer RPGs moved away from the usual dungeon crawl hack’n’slash towards the attempt to allow players to role play. They were given moral choices, freedom to explore and act as they pleased, etc. Combat systems evolved as well, with some games moving towards real time combat. Other games introduced NPCs who were acting independently through the game world (like Wizardry VII).

All these developments were lost to the Japanese, who continue to make Wizardry III and Ultima III clones to this day.

Super Mario Bros. came out in 1967. Pong came out in 1880. Those are extremely fun. I don't think age should give it a free pass, friend.

Frig off, Icy.

Sad!

Hm let's see you only like 3 JRPGs almost purely for nostalgiafag reasons and include another that isn't even a jrpg, im thinking JRPGs might not be your thing

Even the earliest JRPGs improved on many things they were inspired by. Dragon Quest 1 is much more fun to play than the early Ultima games.
Also, moving towards simulation and role playing doesn't mean higher quality or even better gameplay, it's just a different direction

>Quality of Life

Unironically off yourself

The West also lost its developments. Look at any modern attempt at dungeon crawlers, they all ape Wizardry 7 or older while shying away from 8 because aping that would actually take effort.

At least the real time variety got a nice follow-up in Grimrock.

I finished it about a week ago for the first time and was really disappointed by the whole thing as well.

It has fun visuals and a lot of pop culture jokes and such but beyond that it's pretty shallow.

My biggest pet peeve and what ultimately made me not like the game was the fact that the entire game you're training to beat Giygas. Then when you finally get there, it didn't even fucking matter that I invested time to prepare for it, by getting items sorted, filling my inventory with things I thought I might need, grinding levels, etc just to fucking pray the gay away at the end of the day.

Honestly, I think it's one of those things that you played as a kid and look back at with rose tinted glasses. As a piece of pop culture that leeched off of other pop culture, it was alright. But as a game, it was honestly a bit lame.

How is that a bad question? You're wondering what's the appeal of it, why do people like it. It's trying to understand the game design choices.

/thread

Play Dragon Quest, the series which Earthbound poorly imitated.