That?s not at all what I was getting at. Strictly speaking, of course I?m not referring to a few simple game mechanics or just because they're from Japan. There is an underlying core game design difference that differentiates a game like Dragon's Dogma to something like Kingdoms of Amalur which is still different than something like Dragon Age but yet is more similar to it than DD. When I was saying it was a dumb distinction, I was referring along the lines of the surface; such as the appeal, and aesthetics.
It?s kind of the same in the way you don?t think a hack-n-slash game as being the same as a beat? em up, or an action game like Bayonetta. WRPGs typically have class specializations, you know the whole thing. While yes, DD does have some of that, they also lack the copious amount of lore WRPGs typically have, choices & consequences (not just story-wise), character interaction, among other things. The narrative in something like Dark Souls is still vastly different than a game like Fallout 2. If you want to talk about appeal, the reasons I play Dark Souls isn?t the same as why I would play Arcanum. That's the reason I'm saying they're JRPGs; yes, they are more western in a few areas, but they still lack the same appeal to make them into WRPGs.
As much as I generally like Extra Credits sometimes, I disagree on their take about video game genres. The current system is just fine because it is based on what I want, and not just on a few different mechanics. The mechanics for a game like Silent Hill are different than Clock Tower 3, but they're still labeled what? Horror. If a game falls flat is because they didn't do something right.