HOW WOULD YOU DESIGN YOUR GAME TO DESTROY/DEMEAN IT'S QUALITY FROM BECOMING A CLASSIC

I wasn't talking about sabotage that's why I said this:

Of course for the great game developers, there's little reason for them to even consider this. After all, who the fuck cares what your audience thinks if you have the capability and the name recognition to always get and pierce through the art of your work for art's sake?

The problem with notoriety is that: (and this is a major reason why I emphasized "great game developers" above)

1) How many actual rpg maker devs have names at all outside the rpg maker community? Hell even within the community does anyone really know the Stephen King of Rpg Maker games or the Jenna Jameson of rpg maker Sprites or the Zuckerberg of script making? ...and even if you do, how big are their actual skills? This isn't to demean the community but there's a huge hump between cult fanbase and mainstream fanbase

2) Even for the mainstream guys, this is vastly different for them each time and each arc of their lives. For example Stephen King and the Coen Brothers are so above the stratosphere, the comparisons can't even work as simplified analogies because even setting aside resources, the stuff like culture and timing and pleasing producers and the pressure of hitting it big blows any problem an rpg maker dev would have even for ones who are doing it professionally.

At the very maximum, at least based on my vastly limited idea of Hollywood, the closest thing to equate this to the film making industry is like producing a limited TV movie DVD where the game developer asks themselves which part they will include for the director's cut and which aren't with the reverse intention that you will show the director's cut in your game and the original version would be used as a padding point plot hub so that when people actually talk about it, they do so in two things.

Some reviewers would overly focus on the optional side quests that the game ends up looking better.

Some reviewers would overly focus on the main plot, even though they only love it thanks to the side quest, and the game ends up being talked as if it was an epic classic.

Even this isn't very good at being an analogy but I've seen hints of it being done in games such as the Final Fantasy series, the recent Mortal Kombat (although I haven't played it but the plot was said to be a copy of the horrible MK 2 movie but because of the model, the recent MK got praises for it's story), Infinity Engine games like Baldur's Gate 2/Throne of Bhaal/Planescape Torment and some of the indie games to see how this may be possible.

I consider this very poor analogy though because often times the examples are tantamount to just asking "What left-over stuff do you save up for to insert into the sequel?" where as the more subtle stuff like say comedy shows always having some straight guy as a lead to extend the length of a TV show by delaying character development or how some more plot oriented TV series are known for resetting the development of the characters or replacing a fired/released staff with a semi-clone but one played by a different actress are all removed from the topic because they appear as sabotage.

The worse part about that question is that the less we talk about a player not sabotaging the work and the less subtle the game designs are shared the more useless it becomes both due to the example becoming more specific that it can't apply to any other games and also because it's more politically correct and it is rarely that clean during the actual production process.

If all these simply feels like they jump all over the place, just look at your example and try to dissect it.

How can the strategy of absorbing the blowback apply to rpg maker game designers especially the newbie ones even when you chop it up?

How can releasing stinkpiles not come off as sabotage anyway to a game designer who has no name, little fanbase and a small chance of having their game hype go viral?

Then you add that they to have to deal with notoriety once they go public when (at least to my impression) rpg maker game designers gain notoriety because a public game they released, whether future or present, finally gained notoriety even after they have made several games. Even for guys like Stephen King, they weren't releasing instant hits and once they had that notoriety, it came first and foremost because he kept releasing great books which then gets made to the movie before the strategy a comparable analogical attempt of demeaning comes in but wrongly executed as most Hollywood producers tend to botch it up. King's movies then end up sabotaging themselves and the whole sequence becomes incomparable. Greatness of their magnitude brings too many layers to simply amount to much decent advice applicable to game design. Only rpg maker developers IMO can share a close enough account of such game designs.

author=Craze
You seem to think that people can design or force the creation of a classic/legacy, I think? Like, I have no idea what you're saying because your posts are just some sort of fapping about having read some dictionaries and famous quotations about literature and trying to apply them to a small, niche community of game-related people who have better things to do than read articles about fucking sabotaging your own game.

I'm going to go with LockeZ here on "this is incomprehensible." It's also pointless and absurd.

I really hope that you feel so goddamn intelligent about this constant stream of terrible, overly lengthy and haughty posts so that my disapproval hurts your ego immensely and you stop mucking up RMN further.

I actually feel better believe it or not. Aside from part about Lockez and the rest, the statements you issued above actually made me feel relieved in the same way someone feels relieved that they had the opposite opinion of a bad judge.

First sentence alone, total opposite of what I mean unlike say someone who is wondering what I'm writing. It shows that you personally harbor ill will against me so much that instead of being confused by my words, you wrote the exact opposite of it and all you had to do was to reverse your entire post to get my premise but because deep down you yourself harbor high and mighty attitude towards others who make you feel bad, instead of weighing upon your own words and just flipping them around to understand mine, you end showing your own hypocrisy and you even fail at something like a basic grammar check when referencing to one quote and talking as if there were quotations. The best part was you bringing up literature as if you need to have read tons of literature to know someone like Mark Twain.

You even indirectly insulted the contents of kentona's post because that's what he was trying to convey when he wrote this:

trying to apply them to a small, niche community of game-related people who have better things to do than read articles about fucking sabotaging your own game. (with the exception that he was using movies of course)

...and my reply did the opposite of agreeing with that. You are the type of poster whom I'm glad I can't communicate well with because I worry that if you somehow got how close you are to understanding my threads, you'll just ruin it with your own high and mighty hypocritical contents that are guaranteed to not lead to anything helpful at all as far as contributing to the pursuit of better game design goes. This isn't to say you aren't a great game designer, I certainly know little about you, but you are the type to guarantee unhelpful posts but thank god you understood my writing. You understood it and reject it. Thank god. Hopefully that means I get less of your types in my thread from now on.