Since I'm fairly certain that the flaming in this thread is bound to get it shut down sooner or later, I thought I would post my sentiments on the WRPG vs. JRPG "innovation debate" here for posterity's sake since it's something I've spent a lot of time thinking about. In the end, it ultimately outlines my philosophy when it comes to liking and disliking games in general (read: remaining ambivalent towards classifying by genre), but it's been tweaked for that particular thread. Whether you agree with it or not is cool by me as long as you're civil about it; I just wanted my two cents posted in a more stable place since I doubt I'll be reiterating all this very soon.
 
-----
 
I think the question I always ask myself the most when this issue crops is why JRPGs have to inherently change on a fundamental level. The industry is often so hellbent on propagating supposed innovations that the games that merely opt to make refinements to the formula are usually seen as lesser games because they lack ambition. Maybe this is just me, but if you give me the choice of playing a game that has maybe a few innovative ideas but is lackluster on the rest of the execution versus a game that knows what it is ahead of time and works off of that base to make a really sublime experience, I'm going to go with the latter game. The thing about always focusing on innovation is that too much obsession over it on either a superficial or genuine level can make the rest of the product as a whole suffer because too much was gambled on the innovation being the game's saving grace. There are a few games that can get away with that, but those are really rare exceptions, not precedents and there are within both genres that can attest to it.
 
So it's with that in mind that I'll announce that trying to grab my attention by saying a game is a WRPG or JRPG has the exact same effect on me: I continue to think that the game has to do more by its own merits to sell me on it. It's why I'm ultimately just as apathetic towards games like Dragon Age and Oblivion as I am with ones like Dragon Quest and Star Ocean before playing any of them. A good game is a good game by virtue of its own qualities, not by the genre it belongs in. If a game can do that and tell me why it is a game that should matter by what it personally does, then I'm into it 100 percent; I won't care if it doesn't advance its respective genre if it just accomplishes the mission it sets out to do well. Not every game is meant to rebuild the wheel like that.
 
If a game isn't overly innovative, then my main concern is whether or not it can contextualize the fundamentals it works off of in ways that are compelling. If there's a problem some RPGs on both ends might really have at least for me, it's not the supposed lack of innovation at all, but rather the inability for some to take those time-tested formulas and apply them in ways that are fresh and relevant today to me. Whether that is or isn't the case for you, I don't know, but it's what's personally going on with me. That's why I love games like Persona 4 so much. It's brilliant precisely because it takes those JRPG building blocks and doesn't try to start gameplay revolutions where they aren't needed; it just takes them and uses them in ways to deeply connect with the player. It's still turn-based battling, but you're doing them with a real sense of camaraderie because of the Social Link feature. If a boss has you on the ropes, you know your good bud Chie or Yosuke will have your back and come to your rescue without you needing to ask. Even outside of battling, the storytelling methods are still standard; it's just that the execution in the setting, plot, writing, and characterization are done in ways that are really relatable to me. It all has quite a lot of impact and your antics with the main plot and side stories in the Social Links end up being tied into the battling anyway, creating this really harmonious feel between all of the components. Are any of them very inventive on their own? Not really; in fact a lot of it has already been done in previous Megami Tensei and other RPGs to varying extents, but it's the way in which it's all contextualized that matters to me. With regard to Western RPGs, the same sorts of things can be said for why I have a profound love of Morrowind to this day; as a Western RPG, it knows what it's doing and accomplishes its goals in ways I find to be really fun and immersive. It might not have the same reasons for why I love something like Persona 4, but that's the point: I love it because it operates on its own terms and does it in a manner I find to be enjoyable.
 
It's not just that a game has features A, B, C that matter to me, but does their execution operate in a matter that resonates with me? It's an issue that all games have to deal with equally, regardless of genre, because that's ultimately the objective they have to achieve at the end of the day. Do they all succeed? That's a matter of personal opinion. Regardless of whether a game chooses the route of innovation or of refinement, as long as it's successful on its own terms that's all that matters to me. It's why I can have love for games like Persona 4 and Morrowind, Tales of Vesperia and Fallout 3, and so many other contrasting combinations equally. They all work very well as games and I feel no need to choose between one genre over the other; I care way more about the games themselves than the genre they inhabit, since a genre can't tell me about a game's intrinsic qualities at all.