
10 reviews
Review
Subscribe
Nominate
Submit Media
RSS
This Is It...
Sated- 10/24/2010 10:58 PM
Griever plays Alter A.I.L.A. Genesis:
If I said that Alter A.I.L.A. Genesis was one of the most anticipated RPGMaker games since Don Miguel originally translated the maker, I don’t think there are many people who would accuse me of being silly. However, when I take that a step further and say that AAG is by far the game I've looked forward to most, people might start thinking exactly that. This is because there are dozens of other games that people would point to instead, games like A Blurred Line and Hero's Realm (feel free to discuss your own choices), but the fact is that no other RPGMaker game has caught my attention quite like this project did. Ever since playing the demo I've been waiting for the day that this game was finished, so much so that I volunteered to help beta-test it just so that I could get my hands on it earlier than expected. Having said all that, I guess you should look at this less as a review and more as an answer to this question:
Does AAG live up to the expectations I had of it?
A Brave, New, Horizontal World
The best place to start would be with the feature that caught my attention most; the side-scrolling area-maps. It’s incredibly rare to play a role-playing game that works like this, so much so that I can’t actually think of any off the top of my head, and this means that exploration can be a bit disorientating because it is sometimes hard to work out how areas are linked together. However, I personally thought that this made exploration more rewarding, as opposed to more frustrating, because it made “small realisations” like "so that's how I get back to x from y" seem really important. By making even the smallest achievement seem like a big deal, AAG ensures that exploration rarely becomes boring, which is a problem a lot of other role-playing games have (cf. Final Fantasy XIII).
Exploration yields a lot of rewards... one of them being this little easter-egg!
AAG doesn’t let this unique method of exploration carry all the burden, though. It still makes sure that the things that are “big realisations” in other role-playing games - finding secret areas, reaching hidden items boxes, solving complex puzzles – are handled well. Take items boxes, for instance, a device that is used in almost all role-playing games to reward players for exploration. AAG ensures that it gets the most out of this device in two ways:
The first is a fairly common way of making the most of item boxes, by ensuring that “hidden” item boxes are visible to you from areas that you can’t yet reach them from. What this does is that it ensures the player is eager to find them and gives them direction in their exploration. You don't wander around aimlessly hoping to find items and end up dissapointed when you don't get any, instead you know exactly where you're trying to get to. As I say, though, this is a fairly common thing to do, so much so that any good role-playing game will almost certainly do it.
The second method AAG uses to get the most out of item boxes is less common, that being the way AAG grades item boxes into two groups: “common” and “unique”. By doing this, the game ensures that know beforehand whether or not you’re looking for something good, which means that it prevents you from being disappointed if you put in a lot of effort and end up with a less-than-great item. The best examples of other games that do this would be the Zelda series; it works really well in those games and it works really well in AAG too.
Essentially, the way item boxes are used in AAG boils down to this; increased anticipation and less disappointment. Where’s the downside? There isn't one, and because AAG applies this logic to pretty much all exploration, the side-view style works really well.
Attack, Attack, Attack-Attack-Attack!
The second thing that caught my attention when I was playing the AAG demo was the battle-system because, despite using RPGMaker 2003's broken default battle-system, Neok was managing to squeeze a lot out of it. Admittedly, some of the features Neok was introducing seemed really gimicky and I wasn't too sure about the difficulty of the battles, but Neok has took the comments he recieved after releasing the demo and crafted something truly spectacular within a pretty limited engine.
However, it is impossible to describe the battle-system without going into how it effects the way you equip your characters and vice-versa, so I’m going to have to tackle both at the same time.
The AP/EX system is the stand-out system that Neok has implemented and it basically dictates how you go about defeating enemies and equipping characters. On the face of it, each skill your characters have cost AP, which can be regenerated by defending and by using items, and EX, which can be “charged” through the use of skills. This seems really simplistic and almost makes battles seem a simple case of “charging” up your best skills over and over until the enemies are dead. However, it isn’t that simple or mundane in practice and this is because the way AP/EX work is dictated by the “mode” your character has equipped.
Modes can slow or quicken the rate at which you get AP/EX, doing so in a trade-off against negative or positive status effects respectively (i.e. earning X more AP per turn may lead to Y% of your HP being removed each turn), so balancing these “modes” – and there is often only one of each mode – to get an optimum damage output is the name of the game. This system adds an incredible amount of depth to battles and also makes equipment a lot more important than “sword A deals more damage than sword B, I’ll equip sword A!”, I was really impressed with how everything came together.
Another system Neok has put into the battles is an element system and, on the face of it, it’s exactly the kind of resistance/weakness system that pretty much every role-playing game since the beginning of time uses. Much like the AP/EX system, though, the reason elements work so well is because they’re used to make sure that setting up your equipment is really important. This is because (pretty much) all the weapons you can equip have an element attributed to them and, as most enemies have a massive resistance to one or more of the six elements available, if you don’t manage to balance elements out properly you’re going to have a really hard time getting all your characters dealing a respectable amount of damage. This is made all the more important because enemies have predictable patterns of resistance based on the “class” of enemy they are, which makes sure you study them carefully to come up with combinations of elements that are unlikely to be resisted at the same time as each other. That AAG makes sure that you’re rewarded for being observant is really important.
You see this guy? He is going to stomp your face if your modes aren't set-up properly!
There is only one aspect of the battles that doesn’t have a massive influence on your equipment and, ironically, its the one I like the least: Field effects. Field effects are things like all units having their HP healed by a little each turn or all units having reduced defence, little changes that are supposed to have a big influence on how battles pan out. You are able to induce these with items and bosses can induce them repeatedly and, when it comes to boss fights, they’re fairly clever because they add another level of strategy. However, because boss fights are pretty much the only time you’re really going to use or encounter them, they feel a little underused. I would’ve personally liked to see them applied in a lot more fights in order to give certain areas more flavour (a field effect that “poisons” everyone would’ve worked well in sewer areas, for example) but this didn’t happen. Their under use doesn’t really drag the game down in any way, but I would definitely consider it a missed opportunity.
To summarise so far: Exploration is really good, the battles work really well and equipment is actually important. Where’s the catch? Well, there really isn’t one as far as the gameplay goes. Everything about the gameplay links together really well and, aside from the under implementation of the field effects, I don’t have a bad word to say about AAG in this respect. The game really delivers when it comes to its gameplay so, if we go back to my original question, you’d have to say that AAG lives up to my expectations thus far.
What about the writing?
One thing that I was really interested in was how Neok was going to twist the multi-path storyline of the original Alter A.I.L.A into a more traditional, linear storyline without making everything about the story seem forced. By replacing sequences that required the player to make decisions with sequences where the characters make decisions for themselves, I thought that Neok was running a rather fine line and that he was going to have a really difficult task making the characters, especially the main character, seem natural. Basically, I thought there was a big risk of the storyline falling flat without the player-based interactions that drove the plot of the original Alter A.I.L.A. forward. However, the storyline that Neok has come up with is brilliant and I don’t have enough praise for it. The twists and turns from start to finish are well timed, well plotted and never manage to seem (too) forced. The game manages to grab you early on and then makes sure you keep playing through what can only be described as a roller-coaster ride. I loved every minute of it.
The dialogue is also good and I loved the exchanges between the characters as the twists the storyline took changed them from allies to enemies and back to allies again. One particular monologue that Erin directs at Scott (those who have played the game will probably know which one I am talking about; I won’t say more so that I don’t spoil anything) was particularly excellent, but the truth is that there are tonnes of enjoyable cutscenes scattered throughout this game.
As for the characters themselves, it is definitely true that the characters are all massively stereotypical and do little to step outside of those stereotypes. However, for the most part, Neok manages to make you care about them anyway. You will end up feeling a real connection to these characters by the time you’ve finished playing and will no longer care that they are “only” stereotypes, something that I think Neok achieves by showing us the flaws of his characters instead of just their strengths, a problem that stereotypes usually perpetuate. I have to admit that this isn’t true for all of the characters and there are definitely some that could’ve been fleshed out a little better (I’m looking at you, Dread!), but those characters who are central to the storyline are generally well written. I have very few complaints.
Basically, the storyline in AAG hooks you and, aided by entertaining dialogue and a cast of well-written characters, doesn’t let go. For the second time in this review, I have to come to the conclusion that AAG manages to live up to my expectations. In fact, that’s selling it a bit short, because in this respect it has surpassed my expectations. I always thought that the gameplay would be brilliant after playing the demo and the full version doesn’t disappoint, but I was never too sure about the writing and AAG amazed me in that respect anyway!
Pretty Things...
I’ll just come out and say it: This game looks spectacular. I shouldn’t need to write anything about the graphics in this game because you don’t even need to play the game to know that they’re spectacular, all you need to do is scan through a few of the screenshots.
No clever caption needed.
As for what is most impressive about them; that honour has to go to the comic-styled cutscenes that the game uses. Not only do these cutscenes look amazing, and it must’ve taken a long time for Neok to come up with them all, they add so much to the dialogue. It's much the same as the way the character animations in Final Fantasy VI added to the script in that game. Being able to see the facial expressions and body language of the characters is something that people take for granted now that it is the norm in high-definition games, but it is far from the norm in the RM* world and it really makes a massive difference.
Another part of the graphics that I found really amazing were the in-battle character animations. Despite the RPGMaker 2003 engine being terrible for creating battle-animations, especially when it comes to character animations, Neok has managed to create animations that look really smooth. I was incredibly surprised with the range of animations displayed by the characters and, having tried to do similar things in my own games, I’m still not quite sure how Neok has managed to get away with it.
As for the music, it’s equally as good. I also didn’t recognise much of it, which is always nice. A special mention should go to the frantically paced battle music, a track that I never got tired of throughout the whole experience, but I really don’t think Neok did anything wrong with any of the chosen pieces. I quite often play videogames with my own music on in the background, at least for a little while (grinding usually induces this when it comes to RPGs), but that didn’t happen once with AAG because there really wasn’t any need.
You can't hear it, so just trust me when I say that the music in this battle is as immense as the battle looks.
The Final Score
I’m aware that this probably reads less like a review and more like rampant fanboyism and, in that respect, I’m (almost) sorry. There’s nothing I can really do about it, though, because there just isn’t much to criticise in this game. I found the battles to be well-balanced and entertaining, I loved the in-depth customisation available through the equipment system, I thought that exploration worked incredibly well, the storyline gripped me, the dialogue is emotional and entertaining, the graphics are amazing and the music is well chosen. Downsides? None at all.
This is it, this is the best RM* game. 10/10
If I said that Alter A.I.L.A. Genesis was one of the most anticipated RPGMaker games since Don Miguel originally translated the maker, I don’t think there are many people who would accuse me of being silly. However, when I take that a step further and say that AAG is by far the game I've looked forward to most, people might start thinking exactly that. This is because there are dozens of other games that people would point to instead, games like A Blurred Line and Hero's Realm (feel free to discuss your own choices), but the fact is that no other RPGMaker game has caught my attention quite like this project did. Ever since playing the demo I've been waiting for the day that this game was finished, so much so that I volunteered to help beta-test it just so that I could get my hands on it earlier than expected. Having said all that, I guess you should look at this less as a review and more as an answer to this question:
Does AAG live up to the expectations I had of it?
A Brave, New, Horizontal World
The best place to start would be with the feature that caught my attention most; the side-scrolling area-maps. It’s incredibly rare to play a role-playing game that works like this, so much so that I can’t actually think of any off the top of my head, and this means that exploration can be a bit disorientating because it is sometimes hard to work out how areas are linked together. However, I personally thought that this made exploration more rewarding, as opposed to more frustrating, because it made “small realisations” like "so that's how I get back to x from y" seem really important. By making even the smallest achievement seem like a big deal, AAG ensures that exploration rarely becomes boring, which is a problem a lot of other role-playing games have (cf. Final Fantasy XIII).

Exploration yields a lot of rewards... one of them being this little easter-egg!
AAG doesn’t let this unique method of exploration carry all the burden, though. It still makes sure that the things that are “big realisations” in other role-playing games - finding secret areas, reaching hidden items boxes, solving complex puzzles – are handled well. Take items boxes, for instance, a device that is used in almost all role-playing games to reward players for exploration. AAG ensures that it gets the most out of this device in two ways:
The first is a fairly common way of making the most of item boxes, by ensuring that “hidden” item boxes are visible to you from areas that you can’t yet reach them from. What this does is that it ensures the player is eager to find them and gives them direction in their exploration. You don't wander around aimlessly hoping to find items and end up dissapointed when you don't get any, instead you know exactly where you're trying to get to. As I say, though, this is a fairly common thing to do, so much so that any good role-playing game will almost certainly do it.
The second method AAG uses to get the most out of item boxes is less common, that being the way AAG grades item boxes into two groups: “common” and “unique”. By doing this, the game ensures that know beforehand whether or not you’re looking for something good, which means that it prevents you from being disappointed if you put in a lot of effort and end up with a less-than-great item. The best examples of other games that do this would be the Zelda series; it works really well in those games and it works really well in AAG too.
Essentially, the way item boxes are used in AAG boils down to this; increased anticipation and less disappointment. Where’s the downside? There isn't one, and because AAG applies this logic to pretty much all exploration, the side-view style works really well.
Attack, Attack, Attack-Attack-Attack!
The second thing that caught my attention when I was playing the AAG demo was the battle-system because, despite using RPGMaker 2003's broken default battle-system, Neok was managing to squeeze a lot out of it. Admittedly, some of the features Neok was introducing seemed really gimicky and I wasn't too sure about the difficulty of the battles, but Neok has took the comments he recieved after releasing the demo and crafted something truly spectacular within a pretty limited engine.
However, it is impossible to describe the battle-system without going into how it effects the way you equip your characters and vice-versa, so I’m going to have to tackle both at the same time.
The AP/EX system is the stand-out system that Neok has implemented and it basically dictates how you go about defeating enemies and equipping characters. On the face of it, each skill your characters have cost AP, which can be regenerated by defending and by using items, and EX, which can be “charged” through the use of skills. This seems really simplistic and almost makes battles seem a simple case of “charging” up your best skills over and over until the enemies are dead. However, it isn’t that simple or mundane in practice and this is because the way AP/EX work is dictated by the “mode” your character has equipped.
Modes can slow or quicken the rate at which you get AP/EX, doing so in a trade-off against negative or positive status effects respectively (i.e. earning X more AP per turn may lead to Y% of your HP being removed each turn), so balancing these “modes” – and there is often only one of each mode – to get an optimum damage output is the name of the game. This system adds an incredible amount of depth to battles and also makes equipment a lot more important than “sword A deals more damage than sword B, I’ll equip sword A!”, I was really impressed with how everything came together.
Another system Neok has put into the battles is an element system and, on the face of it, it’s exactly the kind of resistance/weakness system that pretty much every role-playing game since the beginning of time uses. Much like the AP/EX system, though, the reason elements work so well is because they’re used to make sure that setting up your equipment is really important. This is because (pretty much) all the weapons you can equip have an element attributed to them and, as most enemies have a massive resistance to one or more of the six elements available, if you don’t manage to balance elements out properly you’re going to have a really hard time getting all your characters dealing a respectable amount of damage. This is made all the more important because enemies have predictable patterns of resistance based on the “class” of enemy they are, which makes sure you study them carefully to come up with combinations of elements that are unlikely to be resisted at the same time as each other. That AAG makes sure that you’re rewarded for being observant is really important.

You see this guy? He is going to stomp your face if your modes aren't set-up properly!
There is only one aspect of the battles that doesn’t have a massive influence on your equipment and, ironically, its the one I like the least: Field effects. Field effects are things like all units having their HP healed by a little each turn or all units having reduced defence, little changes that are supposed to have a big influence on how battles pan out. You are able to induce these with items and bosses can induce them repeatedly and, when it comes to boss fights, they’re fairly clever because they add another level of strategy. However, because boss fights are pretty much the only time you’re really going to use or encounter them, they feel a little underused. I would’ve personally liked to see them applied in a lot more fights in order to give certain areas more flavour (a field effect that “poisons” everyone would’ve worked well in sewer areas, for example) but this didn’t happen. Their under use doesn’t really drag the game down in any way, but I would definitely consider it a missed opportunity.
To summarise so far: Exploration is really good, the battles work really well and equipment is actually important. Where’s the catch? Well, there really isn’t one as far as the gameplay goes. Everything about the gameplay links together really well and, aside from the under implementation of the field effects, I don’t have a bad word to say about AAG in this respect. The game really delivers when it comes to its gameplay so, if we go back to my original question, you’d have to say that AAG lives up to my expectations thus far.
What about the writing?
One thing that I was really interested in was how Neok was going to twist the multi-path storyline of the original Alter A.I.L.A into a more traditional, linear storyline without making everything about the story seem forced. By replacing sequences that required the player to make decisions with sequences where the characters make decisions for themselves, I thought that Neok was running a rather fine line and that he was going to have a really difficult task making the characters, especially the main character, seem natural. Basically, I thought there was a big risk of the storyline falling flat without the player-based interactions that drove the plot of the original Alter A.I.L.A. forward. However, the storyline that Neok has come up with is brilliant and I don’t have enough praise for it. The twists and turns from start to finish are well timed, well plotted and never manage to seem (too) forced. The game manages to grab you early on and then makes sure you keep playing through what can only be described as a roller-coaster ride. I loved every minute of it.
The dialogue is also good and I loved the exchanges between the characters as the twists the storyline took changed them from allies to enemies and back to allies again. One particular monologue that Erin directs at Scott (those who have played the game will probably know which one I am talking about; I won’t say more so that I don’t spoil anything) was particularly excellent, but the truth is that there are tonnes of enjoyable cutscenes scattered throughout this game.
As for the characters themselves, it is definitely true that the characters are all massively stereotypical and do little to step outside of those stereotypes. However, for the most part, Neok manages to make you care about them anyway. You will end up feeling a real connection to these characters by the time you’ve finished playing and will no longer care that they are “only” stereotypes, something that I think Neok achieves by showing us the flaws of his characters instead of just their strengths, a problem that stereotypes usually perpetuate. I have to admit that this isn’t true for all of the characters and there are definitely some that could’ve been fleshed out a little better (I’m looking at you, Dread!), but those characters who are central to the storyline are generally well written. I have very few complaints.
Basically, the storyline in AAG hooks you and, aided by entertaining dialogue and a cast of well-written characters, doesn’t let go. For the second time in this review, I have to come to the conclusion that AAG manages to live up to my expectations. In fact, that’s selling it a bit short, because in this respect it has surpassed my expectations. I always thought that the gameplay would be brilliant after playing the demo and the full version doesn’t disappoint, but I was never too sure about the writing and AAG amazed me in that respect anyway!
Pretty Things...
I’ll just come out and say it: This game looks spectacular. I shouldn’t need to write anything about the graphics in this game because you don’t even need to play the game to know that they’re spectacular, all you need to do is scan through a few of the screenshots.

No clever caption needed.
As for what is most impressive about them; that honour has to go to the comic-styled cutscenes that the game uses. Not only do these cutscenes look amazing, and it must’ve taken a long time for Neok to come up with them all, they add so much to the dialogue. It's much the same as the way the character animations in Final Fantasy VI added to the script in that game. Being able to see the facial expressions and body language of the characters is something that people take for granted now that it is the norm in high-definition games, but it is far from the norm in the RM* world and it really makes a massive difference.
Another part of the graphics that I found really amazing were the in-battle character animations. Despite the RPGMaker 2003 engine being terrible for creating battle-animations, especially when it comes to character animations, Neok has managed to create animations that look really smooth. I was incredibly surprised with the range of animations displayed by the characters and, having tried to do similar things in my own games, I’m still not quite sure how Neok has managed to get away with it.
As for the music, it’s equally as good. I also didn’t recognise much of it, which is always nice. A special mention should go to the frantically paced battle music, a track that I never got tired of throughout the whole experience, but I really don’t think Neok did anything wrong with any of the chosen pieces. I quite often play videogames with my own music on in the background, at least for a little while (grinding usually induces this when it comes to RPGs), but that didn’t happen once with AAG because there really wasn’t any need.

You can't hear it, so just trust me when I say that the music in this battle is as immense as the battle looks.
The Final Score
I’m aware that this probably reads less like a review and more like rampant fanboyism and, in that respect, I’m (almost) sorry. There’s nothing I can really do about it, though, because there just isn’t much to criticise in this game. I found the battles to be well-balanced and entertaining, I loved the in-depth customisation available through the equipment system, I thought that exploration worked incredibly well, the storyline gripped me, the dialogue is emotional and entertaining, the graphics are amazing and the music is well chosen. Downsides? None at all.
This is it, this is the best RM* game. 10/10

Posts 

rampant fanboyism
yes
personally, I found the battles to be fruitless and non-rewarding, the perspective gimmicky and hard to navigate properly, the story completely random, the characters incredibly stereotypical and made me cringe at every turn (meaning i wanted to kill every single one of them), visuals were barren, mediocre rips, partly-tolerable art, some wierd looking animations and pretty decent music (although very uneven)
... and still the game wasn't half bad. for an rm game, it's pretty sweet.
For a RM game to include rampant fanboyism is an achievement all onto itself. I wholeheartedly agree with every thing FG says; this is most likely the best RM out there, by a couple of miles. As he has mentioned, it is hard to criticize something that has so few flaws and so many things that just click and work together, not to mention the absurd amount of polish that went into this game.
Excellent review is excellent. There is a couple things I could disagree with, but that's just the pickyness in me in games, otherwise yes, this game is now considered unmatched. >8D
The game wasn't half bad, but it wasn't half good either. I suppose you're entitled to your opinion, but it seems we've all lowered our standards if "Wow, this game isn't very bad!" equates to 4.5 and 5 star reviews. What do you do when a genuinely good game comes around and the highest score you can give it puts it on the same level as games which were "surprisingly not bad"?
EDIT: For clarification, I hold RM games to the same standards I hold commercial games. Thus, when I write a 2.5/5, I'm not saying a game is "bad" but that it's unremarkable. To hold RM games to a lower standard is to never aspire to go beyond mediocrity.
EDIT: For clarification, I hold RM games to the same standards I hold commercial games. Thus, when I write a 2.5/5, I'm not saying a game is "bad" but that it's unremarkable. To hold RM games to a lower standard is to never aspire to go beyond mediocrity.
For a RM game to include rampant fanboyism is an achievement all onto itself. I wholeheartedly agree with every thing FG says; this is most likely the best RM out there, by a couple of miles. As he has mentioned, it is hard to criticize something that has so few flaws and so many things that just click and work together, not to mention the absurd amount of polish that went into this game.Other RM games have attracted rampant fanboyism and been pretty terrible. Popularity is not a measure of quality. To say that this is by far the best RM game out there is to claim that you've played every RM game out there.
Hm... The one thing I disagree with here is the note about field effects. I found them really annoying. They were an interesting concept, but because they're usually unexpected in boss battles, you can't really go in prepared to counter them. But furthermore, the ones that bosses use are recurring. Most of the effects bosses use stack things in their favour, so you're expected to negate them. Problem is, you'll probably have to waste 5 field effect items or so every time, because whenever your effect wears off, theirs just appears again. And some of them can be really crippling (GWeapon, I'm looking at you), meaning you have to keep a large stock of field effects constantly.
If bosses had to actually give up a turn to use their field effects, or if Neok kept the "Zone" items, I would have tolerated it more. As it stands though, I just found it pretty annoying.
Also:
As for the whole "OMG the characters are trite cliches", I didn't feel that way about most of them... (Hawk and Erin, in particular, were very well-done, I thought) Although maybe I don't read enough stories to encounter them in the first place. :/
If bosses had to actually give up a turn to use their field effects, or if Neok kept the "Zone" items, I would have tolerated it more. As it stands though, I just found it pretty annoying.
Also:
Other RM games have attracted rampant fanboyism and been pretty terrible. Popularity is not a measure of quality.Unfortunately, I must admit that this is true.
As for the whole "OMG the characters are trite cliches", I didn't feel that way about most of them... (Hawk and Erin, in particular, were very well-done, I thought) Although maybe I don't read enough stories to encounter them in the first place. :/
I suppose you're entitled to your opinion, but it seems we've all lowered our standards if "Wow, this game isn't very bad!" equates to 4.5 and 5 star reviews.
For clarification, I hold RM games to the same standards I hold commercial games. Thus, when I write a 2.5/5, I'm not saying a game is "bad" but that it's unremarkable. To hold RM games to a lower standard is to never aspire to go beyond mediocrity.
I genuinely believe that this game gets the absolute best it can out of the engine it was made with, hence it gets the absolute best score that I can give it. The only way this game could be better is if it was coded from the ground up in a completely different engine so that Enterbrain's lazy coding didn't come into effect, but there's hardly anything Neok (or any other RM* user) can do about that.
post=212876I suppose you're entitled to your opinion, but it seems we've all lowered our standards if "Wow, this game isn't very bad!" equates to 4.5 and 5 star reviews.For clarification, I hold RM games to the same standards I hold commercial games. Thus, when I write a 2.5/5, I'm not saying a game is "bad" but that it's unremarkable. To hold RM games to a lower standard is to never aspire to go beyond mediocrity.
I genuinely believe that this game gets the absolute best it can out of the engine it was made with, hence it gets the absolute best score that I can give it. The only way this game could be better is if it was coded from the ground up in a completely different engine so that Enterbrain's lazy coding didn't come into effect, but there's hardly anything Neok (or any other RM* user) can do about that.
But the engine is a choice of the developer, too. By choosing a limited engine, you're accepting that your game will be limited by the constraints of that engine. By that logic, if AAG were to be released as, say, an XNA game, and be otherwise exactly the same game, it should have a greatly diminished score for not meeting the boundaries of the engine's limitations. What should matter is the final product, the game, and not the development environment.
But the engine is a choice of the developer, too. By choosing a limited engine, you're accepting that your game will be limited by the constraints of that engine. By that logic, if AAG were to be released as, say, an XNA game, and be otherwise exactly the same game, it should have a greatly diminished score for not meeting the boundaries of the engine's limitations. What should matter is the final product, the game, and not the development environment.
No, by my logic AAG couldn't be the exact same if it were an XNA game because "Enterbrain's lazy coding (couldn't) come into effect". However, this is irrelevant.
As far as I am concerned, what you're saying is akin to saying that all the games on RMN have terrible graphics because we choose to go with 16-bit graphics (cf. RPGMaker) when we could've chosen to have HD graphics (cf. coded from scratch) instead. You're being very unrealistic.
post=212881But the engine is a choice of the developer, too. By choosing a limited engine, you're accepting that your game will be limited by the constraints of that engine. By that logic, if AAG were to be released as, say, an XNA game, and be otherwise exactly the same game, it should have a greatly diminished score for not meeting the boundaries of the engine's limitations. What should matter is the final product, the game, and not the development environment.No, by my logic AAG couldn't be the exact same if it were an XNA game because "Enterbrain's lazy coding come into effect". However, this is irrelevant.
As far as I am concerned, what you're saying is akin to saying that all the games on RMN have terrible graphics because we choose to go with 16-bit graphics (cf. RPGMaker) when we could've chosen to have HD graphics (cf. coded from scratch) instead. You're being very unrealistic.
post=212881But the engine is a choice of the developer, too. By choosing a limited engine, you're accepting that your game will be limited by the constraints of that engine. By that logic, if AAG were to be released as, say, an XNA game, and be otherwise exactly the same game, it should have a greatly diminished score for not meeting the boundaries of the engine's limitations. What should matter is the final product, the game, and not the development environment.No, by my logic AAG couldn't be the exact same if it were an XNA game because "Enterbrain's lazy coding come into effect". However, this is irrelevant.
As far as I am concerned, what you're saying is akin to saying that all the games on RMN have terrible graphics because we choose to go with 16-bit graphics (cf. RPGMaker) when we could've chosen to have HD graphics (cf. coded from scratch) instead. You're being very unrealistic.
16-bit graphics can look good if done well. There's a difference between graphics and gameplay mechanics. Let me adjust my example, then. If a game was made for XNA with the exact same battle system as AAG, the reaction would be "oh, that's cool" rather than "wow, that's the best you can do with RM2k3." Even if we were to say that expecting professionalism in game development here is unrealistic, AAG could have been far, far better had it been made in XP or VX because of the new avenues the scripting system would be open to it. So the game isn't as good as it could be because there were other, comparable engines it could have been made in without much effort (in fact, probably with far less effort). We give lower scores if a game suffers from poor graphic or sound choice, so why is it unrealistic to insist the same be done of engine choice?
We give lower scores if a game suffers from poor graphic or sound choice, so why is it unrealistic to insist the same be done of engine choice?
Brb, I'm knocking all the scores I've given for RM* games down because the developer didn't get a developer license for the iPhone or something...
This is a ridiculous argument
post=212887Most iPhone games are far worse than the majority of games on RMN.We give lower scores if a game suffers from poor graphic or sound choice, so why is it unrealistic to insist the same be done of engine choice?Brb, I'm knocking all the scores I've given for RM* games down because the developer didn't get a developer license for the iPhone or something...
This is a ridiculous argument
If you honestly think it's "ridiculous" to hold games here to a higher standard than "not bad for an RM game" then we clearly have very different visions of what we can aspire to achieve as developers.
post=212889Nice straw man.
wow another 'everything is better than rm2k3' debate how surprising
post=212843I said it was an achievement.For a RM game to include rampant fanboyism is an achievement all onto itself. I wholeheartedly agree with every thing FG says; this is most likely the best RM out there, by a couple of miles. As he has mentioned, it is hard to criticize something that has so few flaws and so many things that just click and work together, not to mention the absurd amount of polish that went into this game.Other RM games have attracted rampant fanboyism and been pretty terrible. Popularity is not a measure of quality. To say that this is by far the best RM game out there is to claim that you've played every RM game out there.
If you have fans, then you've done something right; quality can have a lot or very little to do with it, in this case, I believe it has a lot to do with it, but to each his own.
If you honestly think it's "ridiculous" to hold games here to a higher standard than "not bad for an RM game" then we clearly have very different visions of what we can aspire to achieve as developers.
I think it's ridiculous to hold games to a higher standard than the engine they're developed in is capable of achieving. Assuming that something is doomed to fail because "lol maker sux" is a very bad attitude to have.
"not bad for an RM game"
I don't know where you're getting this "not bad for an RM game" stuff from because I never said anything of the like about this game. I haven't given this game 5/5 for being "not bad for an RM game".
As far as I'm concerned, Alter A.I.L.A. Genesis is as good an RM* game as you're ever going to get and that's despite being developed in RM2K3. "Not bad for an RM* game" doesn't get a 5/5 out of me: "Not bad for an RM* game" would be something like this and, even though I fucking adore that game, I would never give it 5/5 stars.
post=212903
If you have fans, then you've done something right; quality can have a lot or very little to do with it, in this case, I believe it has a lot to do with it, but to each his own.
Laxius Power?
1) People will score games what they want to score them.
2) People have different viewpoints about what makes a game good.
3) People will judge games differently when they have different opinions about what makes a game good..
That said,
1) AAG is a game with clear, undeniable flaws.
2) The reviewer should not expect to go uncriticized if people have drastically differing viewpoints, as has happened many times at RMN already.
3) Others also have the right to vehemently disagree with x review, the review standards presented in that review and debate the quality of the review, and state those views publicly.
Carry on!
2) People have different viewpoints about what makes a game good.
3) People will judge games differently when they have different opinions about what makes a game good..
That said,
1) AAG is a game with clear, undeniable flaws.
2) The reviewer should not expect to go uncriticized if people have drastically differing viewpoints, as has happened many times at RMN already.
3) Others also have the right to vehemently disagree with x review, the review standards presented in that review and debate the quality of the review, and state those views publicly.
Carry on!
I still think the best thing someone who disagrees with a review can do is write their own review.
I think this review justified its score fairly well, even if I don't personally agree with everything in it. My only complaint, and it's a fairly small one, is that it didn't talk very much about the characters, while at the same time extolling the virtues of the dialogue.
I think this review justified its score fairly well, even if I don't personally agree with everything in it. My only complaint, and it's a fairly small one, is that it didn't talk very much about the characters, while at the same time extolling the virtues of the dialogue.














