any good ps1 western rpgs?

[Clippy]

No one's gonna bring up Wild Arms? Really?

Anyway, I'll strongly second the Blood Omen recommendation. PS1 version is still the definitive version, for now at least, owing to the lack of gamepad support with the GOG port. Though that's a case where the lore aspect doesn't get *really* interesting until the sequels (and Soul Reaver, I think, got ported from the DreamCast to the PS1 back in the day, so it counts, too).

Nobody mentioned Wild Arms because the intended meaning behind 'western' was 'made by western developers' not 'set in the wild west'. It's a great game, just not for this topic.

 

[Kestrel]

Yes, everyone seems to be making that assumption. That's kind of exactly why I brought it up.

(Also, if we're gonna get into the weeds here, your definition of "WRPG" is wrong. The genre of a game isn't determined by the nationality, race, ethnicity of gender identify of whoever created it, it's determined by the content and style of the game itself. This is why people often use "Western-style" instead, as it's somewhat more accurate.)

 

[Stingy Perry]

Legacy of Kain Blood Omen and Diablo were the only western rpg I remember on the ps1 there maybe other but they might be bad so I intend to forget about ‘em.

 

[chrismas]

Yes, everyone seems to be making that assumption. That's kind of exactly why I brought it up.

(Also, if we're gonna get into the weeds here, your definition of "WRPG" is wrong. The genre of a game isn't determined by the nationality, race, ethnicity of gender identify of whoever created it, it's determined by the content and style of the game itself. This is why people often use "Western-style" instead, as it's somewhat more accurate.)

You'd still be wrong as Wild Arms is mechanically totally descended from the Dragon Quest/Final Fantasy brand of RPG ("JRPGs" as some call it) and has none of the hallmarks of the CRPG lineage that's synonymous w/ "Western RPGs" as I assume OP is referring to. Aesthetics usually have nothing to do with how a game is categorized... usually.

 

[Clippy]

@Kestrel
I mean, if we want to split hairs over definitions then we could go oldschool and have CRPGs (the likes of Wizardry, Ultima and, say Baldur's Gate 2 for something that's not ancient by now), ARPGs (Diablo, Nox, heck Secret of Mana fits right in) and JRPGs (the turn-based based stuff like Final Fantasy or Wild Arms). We could tack on SRPGs as well just for the hell of it (FFTactics or Fire Emblem)

I feel that OP asked for CRPGs and ARPGs specifically which is why so many people recommended Wizardry games despite the fact that they were made in Japan. Japan was well-known for JRPGs at the time so the distinction kinda makes sense even if it isn't 100% accurate.

 

[Ailuropoda Melanoleuca]

The original post doesn't really specify one way or the other, so it's mostly down to vibes.

At the time, pretty much *all* console RPGs (available in English) made in Japan, and the vast majority of Western-style RPGs were PC only. There are only a handful of exceptions: I know of Blood Omen, of course, and IIRC there were some ports of Ultima games, or at least some attempts, as well as that one Shadowrun game on the NES. That's about it. I think Summoner 1 might count, too? I think that was a (very early) PS2 game, though it might've been a PS1 game.

 

[Clippy]

At the time, pretty much *all* console RPGs (available in English) made in Japan, and the vast majority of Western-style RPGs were PC only.

This statement right here is why I'm 100% sure OP asked for Western-style RPGs for the console seeing how few there were. His responses to earlier suggestions only confirm my suspicion.

 

[Ailuropoda Melanoleuca]

I mean, I'm definitely autistic enough to know why someone's brain would immediately jump to "Wild Arms," myself.

Anyway, on the subject of lore-heavy games regardless of genre, I'm pretty surprised no one mentioned Suikoden yet. Sure, the first game was pretty basic, but the second game? Not so much. It was one of the earliest examples of a game series where all the games took place in different regions of the same world, with certain stories and characters spanning multiple titles. (In fact, the only series I'm aware of that did this *before* Suikoden was Ultima.)

 

[Kestrel]

You'd still be wrong as Wild Arms is mechanically totally descended from the Dragon Quest/Final Fantasy brand of RPG ("JRPGs" as some call it)

I think you'll find that I am, in fact, not wrong, let alone "still," as I never stated (or implied) that I thought Wild Arms was anything other than the (very conventional) JRPG that it is.

It seems like you just... really want to get into an argument here?

mean, if we want to split hairs over definitions then we could go oldschool and have CRPGs (the likes of Wizardry, Ultima and, say Baldur's Gate 2 for something that's not ancient by now), ARPGs (Diablo, Nox, heck Secret of Mana fits right in) and JRPGs (the turn-based based stuff like Final Fantasy or Wild Arms). We could tack on SRPGs as well just for the hell of it (FFTactics or Fire Emblem)

I feel that OP asked for CRPGs and ARPGs specifically which is why so many people recommended Wizardry games despite the fact that they were made in Japan. Japan was well-known for JRPGs at the time so the distinction kinda makes sense even if it isn't 100% accurate.

I mean, I'm game to go down that rabbit hole any day of the week. Even the term "CRPG" isn't at all uncontroversial these days -- the modern definition tends to point specifically at top-down party-based games, so tons of games that used to be classified as CRPGs simply wouldn't be recognized as such today, like Wizardry, and rather be viewed as DRPGs/dungeon crawlers. These terms shift and change a lot over time, and genre itself is only ever going to a fairly vague way to organize media.

As for the OP, I understand why everyone assumed it was about the WRPGs other than RPG westerns, even if my reasoning is a bit different (namely that the Wild Arms series is, practically speaking, the only real example of the latter, unless we count stuff like Desperados). What I don't understand is why poking some fun at the prompt's ambiguity wound up being interpreted, seemingly, as argumentative.

 

[Clippy]

I mean, I'm game to go down that rabbit hole any day of the week. Even the term "CRPG" isn't at all uncontroversial these days -- the modern definition tends to point specifically at top-down party-based games, so tons of games that used to be classified as CRPGs simply wouldn't be recognized as such today, like Wizardry, and rather be viewed as DRPGs/dungeon crawlers. These terms shift and change a lot over time, and genre itself is only ever going to a fairly vague way to organize media.

I'm not to be quite honest with you. I'm sure we'd be able to arrive at some consensus at the end of the day and I'm sure nailing down the nitty-gritty might have some value for future discussions but I don't think I'm the one to do this sort of thing with. Beyond basic outlines and delimitations I usually intuit things like this unless it's really necessary to put thought into it (and it might be sometimes).

What I don't understand is why poking some fun at the prompt's ambiguity wound up being interpreted, seemingly, as argumentative.

I'd chalk it up to things like this not translating to text. More often than not you can't read playful poking and I most certainly didn't read it in you mentioning Wild Arms. I don't mean to say I thought you were being combative or anything and I certainly wasn't responding to you as such but it looked like you were coming out of left field rather than facetious.