Good argument :D
DD's often recommended for fans of Dragon Age: Origins and I guess the sequels, too. It's a bit less tactical and more exploration based and definitely super awesome.
JRPGs definitely have a sense of style that's yet to be matched by a WRPG, but I wouldn't say WRPGs are bland and stale (except maybe Fallout 3.) Gritty, maybe, but they're shooting for a different goal.
Grandia had good combat. Fire Emblem I wouldn't really class as a straight RPG. If turn-based or active-time battle floats your boat, then more power to you :) One of the reasons I have difficulty going back to the FF series is because the combat's too mundane and time-consuming. I can handle FFX because it's a quick transition, slick, seamless command execution, and a quick EXP/gil screen. The others, not so much.
Your comment definitely took the wrong point from the article.
In your example, you (jokingly I hope) say that you won't play the Souls series because they don't have the JRPG label. If you're going to decide whether or not to play a game that you already like, based on whether or not it fits the JRPG or WRPG label, then, well, whatever floats your boat. Doesn't make any sense though. That'd be like reading a really good book and halfway through realizi...
Hey, if we managed to deal with Star Wars, Final Fantasy JP/EN, I'm sure we can cope with God of War! :P
Eh? If you're using WRPG/JRPG as geographical terms, then you could call the witcher a JRPG. In terms of genre, though, it's definitely a lot more of a WRPG.
Sucks that you never made it through Origins! I'd recommend giving it another shot. It's definitely one of the most well fleshed-out, intricately designed, and (subtly) hilarious RPGs - games, period, actually - that I've ever played. Tactical combat took a bit to get used to but I now vastly prefer...