Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Post History
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
YOUR TOP FEATURES IN GAMES
Posts
harmonic
View playlists
CloseI think what Craze meant to say in his own elegant manner, is that a unified design direction is better than "design by committee." Design is something that cannot be approached frivolously if a good product is to be released.
Well... the topic is "Your top features in games". So people listed them. Developers and designers can take it or leave it. They aren't dictating to all developers out there should always do for all things.
Some people are certainly taking it that way for some reason.
And on the flipside, saying that "no, this shouldn't be a top feature of yours because X" is kind of ...inelegant.
Some people are certainly taking it that way for some reason.
And on the flipside, saying that "no, this shouldn't be a top feature of yours because X" is kind of ...inelegant.
author=Craze
I think that this topic is pretty shitty, except for maybe Shinan's posts.
Preference d'Craze: when developers don't go down a fucking checklist, and instead design a game around the game's concept - so top feature: make your damn game and release it
(crazy, I know)
Nobody is saying that developers should pander to players with a grocery list of features, but if you completely ignore what people want, you...well, you end up like George Lucas.
I think it's better to get all of this out there now rather than wait for the inevitable criticism in reviews. Hey, I agree with you; I don't particularly like the attitude that certain features need to be in a game to be worth playing, and I would far rather games, especially indy games, be creative and take risks.
And yet, every day I read articles which feature the 'grocery list' for RPGs. Here's another one:
http://sarcasticgamer.com/wp/index.php/2011/05/are-jrpgs-dying.html#more-66411
Yeah, it sucks, but there it is.
Shinan
4314
author=Lucidstillness
Nobody is saying that developers should pander to players with a grocery list of features, but if you completely ignore what people want, you...well, you end up like George Lucas.
There are those that argue that the fact that Lucas did listen to... people some things did turn out real shit. Yeah Menace was what it was. But there's so much fanservice in Clones and Sith that it cannot have been a coincidence.
author=Lucidstillness
And yet, every day I read articles which feature the 'grocery list' for RPGs. Here's another one:
http://sarcasticgamer.com/wp/index.php/2011/05/are-jrpgs-dying.html#more-66411
Yeah, it sucks, but there it is.
It's fun, however, how, in the second part of the article he explains, taking almost point by point the "grocery list", why these are the very reasons HE loves those games! But it's only him.
Well, you might be right. For all his talk of, "painting his house his own way.", it is obvious from Lucas's success that he knows what sells.
Ultimately, no feedback is a substitute for one's own judgment. What this thread is isn't a sure-fire way to make an AAA game; it is actually just a form of market research into a target demographic that any company would do. The information is there, and it is useful, but it's not necessarily right.
Ultimately, no feedback is a substitute for one's own judgment. What this thread is isn't a sure-fire way to make an AAA game; it is actually just a form of market research into a target demographic that any company would do. The information is there, and it is useful, but it's not necessarily right.
author=Craze
Preference d'Craze: when developers don't go down a fucking checklist, and instead design a game around the game's concept - so top feature: make your damn game and release it
(crazy, I know)
I agree with this utterly and completely - these are the same reasons I had when I wrote the Misanthropic Mechanics article.
What "features" belong in what game are completely dependent on what the game is about. While it may seem more popular to have non-random encounters, that's the train of thought that restricts designers to certain game tropes and standards, and limits the potential of the game.
So yes, while these features are very popular, you have to understand why they're popular, and understand why the games that included them were so good. I don't mean to derail the topic, but emphasizing the importance -or worse, necessity- of particular features is dangerous and encourages a poor approach to game design.
Your first step in starting a new project should not be choosing a feature list, but a concept.
To clarify once and for all; No one is saying that these features are necessary, that they will work for every game, or that the more of these features a game implements, the better it will be. Indeed, most of these suggestions only apply to the very traditional type of JRPGs that RPG Maker was designed to create. They are suggestions based on the complaints gamers have been making for years; nothing more.
Take it or leave it as you see fit.
(I made an edit to better clarify this in the first post, so hopefully this won't come up again.)
Take it or leave it as you see fit.
(I made an edit to better clarify this in the first post, so hopefully this won't come up again.)
Alright, well in that case, here is a feature that seems to be growing in popularity:
Removal of Random Chance from turn-based battle systems: Randomization plays a part in nearly every turn-based battle system, and its role can range from very small to very large. All in all, the mechanic is archaic and *usually* does nothing but detract from the game. A miss at the wrong time means the player dies, but it's not their fault - they just rolled poorly. A critical hit may guarantee them a victory - but instead of being rewarded for playing well or being clever, it was due to random chance, and this feels less fulfilling.
Not that all randomness should be removed from all games and that it doesn't have its place, but holy hell it does NOT need to be in every game.
Removal of Random Chance from turn-based battle systems: Randomization plays a part in nearly every turn-based battle system, and its role can range from very small to very large. All in all, the mechanic is archaic and *usually* does nothing but detract from the game. A miss at the wrong time means the player dies, but it's not their fault - they just rolled poorly. A critical hit may guarantee them a victory - but instead of being rewarded for playing well or being clever, it was due to random chance, and this feels less fulfilling.
Not that all randomness should be removed from all games and that it doesn't have its place, but holy hell it does NOT need to be in every game.
While I can't think of RPGs which have gotten rid of randomization entirely, things definitely do seem to be moving way from the Dungeons & Dragons inspired 'critical hit or miss' system, with less number randomization in more modern games. For example, in the old game Drakkhen, damage randomization was so great that it was possible to kill a major boss in one hit, and also possible to be killed by a lowly enemy with one hit, even with the best armor. You don't see that kind of thing in most modern RPGs.
Another aspect of combat randomness that everybody seems to hate are rare item drops. I recall Roo from Clan of the Greywolf, in the midst of his loving Earthbound retrospective, ranting about how ridiculously hard it was to get the Sword of Kings drop. Players seem to greatly prefer going out of their way to 'earn' rare items, rather than just getting lucky.
Another aspect of combat randomness that everybody seems to hate are rare item drops. I recall Roo from Clan of the Greywolf, in the midst of his loving Earthbound retrospective, ranting about how ridiculously hard it was to get the Sword of Kings drop. Players seem to greatly prefer going out of their way to 'earn' rare items, rather than just getting lucky.
Lucidstillness
While I can't think of RPGs which have gotten rid of randomization entirely
Radiant Historia. Everybody go play it.
author=Crazeiirc, when I attacked, my characters didn't consistently do the exact same damage on the same enemies, so I think my damage output was modified by a random percentage. Also, I couldn't dictate which characters got attacked by enemies. The turn order seemed to have a randomized element to it as well.LucidstillnessRadiant Historia. Everybody go play it.
While I can't think of RPGs which have gotten rid of randomization entirely
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
You not having control over something isn't the same as it being random. And I think 15% difference in damage is probably trivial enough that I'm going to call it within the spiritual bounds of "no randomization", if not within the technical bounds.
I haven't actually played Radiant Historia though. Did enemies actually choose which attacks to use completely non-randomly? Removing misses and criticals and random success rates on ailements wouldn't surprise me, but removing randomness from enemy AI would surprise me a lot.
I haven't actually played Radiant Historia though. Did enemies actually choose which attacks to use completely non-randomly? Removing misses and criticals and random success rates on ailements wouldn't surprise me, but removing randomness from enemy AI would surprise me a lot.
prexus
309
author=Craze
I think that this topic is pretty shitty, except for maybe Shinan's posts.
Preference d'Craze: when developers don't go down a fucking checklist, and instead design a game around the game's concept - so top feature: make your damn game and release it
(crazy, I know)
This is pretty much the point I was getting at.
Make your game how your game has to be for it to be a game. Add the features you want, don't add the features you don't want. Don't feel pigeon-holed into using a Branching Story system just because they are popular now (even though most of these 'branching' systems don't actually branch, you just get a different response and then whoop back on to the rails.) Don't make a Save Anywhere feature if it will be abusable if you don't want people to abuse it, likewise don't feel the need to not use a Save Anywhere feature just because you want your game to be LOLHARD.
Just make your game and be fucking done with it.
as a side note about save anywhere features that I just thought of, I actually like savepoints because they REMIND me to save. I find with Save Anywhere menus I usually only remember to save every so often because I am usually plowing through the game and enjoying it. Then I hit a hard fight, or I let my restorative resources run out by accident and I am screwed because my last save was hours ago. Just a personal anecdote though.
I actually remember screwing myself over as a kid a few times because I forgot to save after playing for like 5 hours and then I died. Save Points are nice even if you can save anywhere, lol.
I actually plan to have both in my game, as well save reminder checkpoints.
Anyway, I've added all the new suggestions to the first post..Which reads rather amusingly. Hopefully I didn't miss anyone. Thanks to everyone who has contributed so far.
I doubt any game could or should feature all of these features as part of its design, and as prexus said, putting in the features that a game actually needs is far more important than putting in the features people want. That said, I do think this thread is a handy reference of what people want.
Anyway, I've added all the new suggestions to the first post..Which reads rather amusingly. Hopefully I didn't miss anyone. Thanks to everyone who has contributed so far.
I doubt any game could or should feature all of these features as part of its design, and as prexus said, putting in the features that a game actually needs is far more important than putting in the features people want. That said, I do think this thread is a handy reference of what people want.
Due to my loneliness growing up, I really enjoy games where I have a party. A group of useful (or not) companions in which to share my killing spree. I'm a pretty straightforward guy; I tend to charge into battles headfirst and think about what I'm going to do after that. Which is why I really like it when I have party members supporting my psychotic rampages with healing spells or things of the like.
UPRC
5516
I'm pretty old fashioned.
1. Enjoyable Atmosphere/Environments: I like it more than anything when the game world is at least somewhat interesting. If the places in the game are in some way fun to visit, it makes me care more about them and, as a result, I'll probably feel more devastated or sad when something bad happens to random castles, cities, towns, etc.
2. Good Story: Simply put, I like to care about the characters and the overall adventure itself. Not much else to say on this one, because it is really straight forward.
3. KISS (Keep it Simple Stupid): My favourite RPGs are the ones that don't throw a dozen systems at me. I like it when games are pretty simplistic in nature and just give me a little room for customization or playing with unfamiliar gameplay aspects. Let's use Final Fantasy as an example. Final Fantasy 4, 6, 9? Great examples of keeping things simple within reason. Final Fantasy 7 is in a grey area with the materia system... And Final Fantasy 8 just has the most ridiculous systems ever, and I felt like the atmosphere and story took a HUGE backseat to overly complicated gameplay systems. I don't like that. Keep. It. Simple. Stupid.
1. Enjoyable Atmosphere/Environments: I like it more than anything when the game world is at least somewhat interesting. If the places in the game are in some way fun to visit, it makes me care more about them and, as a result, I'll probably feel more devastated or sad when something bad happens to random castles, cities, towns, etc.
2. Good Story: Simply put, I like to care about the characters and the overall adventure itself. Not much else to say on this one, because it is really straight forward.
3. KISS (Keep it Simple Stupid): My favourite RPGs are the ones that don't throw a dozen systems at me. I like it when games are pretty simplistic in nature and just give me a little room for customization or playing with unfamiliar gameplay aspects. Let's use Final Fantasy as an example. Final Fantasy 4, 6, 9? Great examples of keeping things simple within reason. Final Fantasy 7 is in a grey area with the materia system... And Final Fantasy 8 just has the most ridiculous systems ever, and I felt like the atmosphere and story took a HUGE backseat to overly complicated gameplay systems. I don't like that. Keep. It. Simple. Stupid.
Good Gameplay. Withut it, even if the game haves amazing graphics and excelent music, is shit for me.
Cuauhtemoc
59
A unique and compelling storyline with few or no current cliche.
And protagonists that aren't stereotypical white knights in shining armor with clear cut viewpoint of what is good and bad.
And protagonists that aren't stereotypical white knights in shining armor with clear cut viewpoint of what is good and bad.
