A CIVIL GARDEN PARTY ~ 2K3 DISCUSSION

author=Jude

author=KingArthur
I would like an explanation of why it is wrong. Why am I wrong to expect to be properly entertained by games that I play?

It's wrong because you are encouraging creative laziness for your own petty, selfish impulses. You are capable of being better than the average Gameloft consumer.

Does being "better than the average Gameloft consumer" entail holding my tongue when I see something that is crap and saying that it's good just because it's an original work? I'm sorry, but if I see something that is crap I'm going to honestly call it by what it is.

That said, you are failing to take into account what a player cares about as opposed to developers. From the PoV of developers, yes, original works probably are "worth more" than public materials and rips simply because of their category even if the quality itself leaves much to be desired.

To a player however, all of that is irrelevant. What matters is simply whether I, as a player, felt a sense of fulfillment from playing the game, whether I genuinely enjoyed the time I spent playing the game. To a player, there is no distinction between original, public, and ripped materials and the developers need to realize and accept this. If the game's own license allows and publicly available materials or rips can improve the game in lieu of original work, then they must be openly considered on equal terms to original works.

In short and with all due respect to developers and artists out there: As a player, I do not care if the stuff I see is original work, if it is crap then I acknowledge it as crap and move on to the next game. The mentality of using original material just because they are original completely ignores the player-side of making a game and is ultimately detrimental to everyone and everything involved.

You are arguing what is rather than how it should be, KingArthur. You are welcome to describe original work as crap, but what you shouldn't be welcome to do is calling unoriginal work superior to original work. Just because players might share your attitude doesn't make it the correct one.

author=KingArthur
Why are original works treated specially? Why are public materials and rips shunned in total favor of original works (down to and including utterly crap ones)?

Original works are treated specially because they are special. They have intrinsic value by having a creative origin. Cultures that value creativity are more successful cultures.

author=KingArthur
And by that you mean to say that using pre-made materials isn't creative? Even with pre-made materials, it still takes creativity and effort to use them well.

You're right. But one is more creative than the other. I pretty explicitly stated "the same game with rips versus original graphics," meaning that all aspects of the game are identical except their graphics. Both are employed in an equally creative way, but in one example the arrangement of the pixels themselves has creative origin also. I am not arguing that a game with original graphics is better than every game without original graphics, because their value is more complex than that.

author=Large

author=Craze
It seems to me that a lot of anti-VX people don't realize that there are quality, highly-customizable scripts out there that allow for you to easily change how a game works beyond just the copypasta.

What you are confusing here is "pro rm2k3" and "anti-VX", which, let me clear up for you, is not the same thing. I think it's a matter of choice, and familiarity.

Frankly, you sound like "Everybody! Make the transition to VX!", at which point we ask "Why?" and you reply "It's BETTA!".

Pretty much this. It's like we're all driving '72 Stingrays and Craze is sitting there in his 2012 Honda Civic LX saying, "I don't know why you guys are still driving that old hunk of junk when mine can do so much more!"

Yes the Civic has a nice MP3 player radio, power windows, really nice air conditioning, wonderful safety features, and probably a TV built in somewhere... But the Stingray still oozes lots of appeal and personality.

2k3 is our Stingray.

author=Darken
People are actually, they just want their games to look like a polished SNES rpg. I suppose if there was an unknown force preventing people from using rips there would barely be any RM games to be made due to "it doesn't look like final fantasy ;_;" or too much work trying to make it look like FF. I really want to make a tutorial on how to make your own graphics specifically for RPG Maker, but in the end people are lazy and I doubt it would accomplish the goal of "JUST SLAP IN WHATEVER YOU CAN MAKE, MS PAINT WHAT THE FUCK EVER JUST DO IT DO IT FUCK SQUARESOFT NOSTALGIA FUCK IT"

Hmm, maybe most people are capable but don't realize it, but certainly not everybody. Even some of the ones that are capable just don't want to. I wouldn't call it lazy, though. If making games is a hobby then it doesn't make sense to spend countless hours learning to create good decent passable graphics. Some people are naturally good and find it interesting to be "pixel artists" while the rest just want to make a game for fun and not take it too seriously. It's not really fair to expect everybody to adhere to high standards because "you" do(not you specifically). This is the realm of amateurs after all.

I kind of always wanted to try one of the new RPGmaker engines. Games like, um, that one YDS was making based on a historical anime looked like the kind of game I would want to make. One of the reasons I dislike most VXP games is the blocky tiles. There's rarely any angle pieces so even though the individual tiles look better, the maps still look like the basic style you see in old GB and NES games.

*bolded important words to clarify that not all games have these problems*

I undersand RM2K3 users, but I also understand Craze, though.
Not having any "emotional" bond nor previous experience with RM2K3, I can't really see any reason why I would ever use it, even supposing I weren't able to script.
Still, time is the most valuable resource and I understand those who do have experience with RM2K3 and don't want to lose time adapting themselves to newer engines.

I can totally understand not liking VX's RTP, not liking the complex process of creating custom VX tiles compared to creating custom tiles in the other makers, and not liking VX mapping. But my solution to all three of those problems would be to use XP, not 2003. If it is graphics you care about, XP is the best at graphics. It's admittedly still slightly more work than 2003, but I think all the extra options make up for it.

Also, this is exactly the thought process I went through in choosing RMXP as a maker.

and VX is a Nissan Cube /blockiness_joke

author=Craze
My car is actually legal, and costs less than 0.6% of a Honda Civic. Also, way to prove my point - I am, in fact, using the superior program which can do more, can do it more efficiently, and has the same interface as 2k/3.

????

I never said that 2003 can do more than VX or that 2003 is superior.

The bottom line is just that a lot of us are comfortable using 2003. It's old, but it still has charm. The thing that is most daunting for me is RGSS because I suck terribly at learning any kind of computer language (after years of trying to learn HTML I still can't even make tables on my own). VX also has fewer resources and I can't stand the RTP.

Still, I'm going to switch over to VX Ace after I finish my current game in 2003 just because I need a change of scenery.