MY FRIENDS THOUGHTS ON OLD MAKERS VS NEW ONES.

On topic; do you know why I’m sticking to 2k3? Because it hard. I can’t do all of the crazy stuff with skills and lighting and whatnot like I can with XV. I have to work with what I’ve got.

Then again I’m crazy like that.

The way I see it as:

1. New makers have the potential of making better games, but it won't make a better game designer. All the new makers do is cater into the motto of how easy it is for anybody to use. New makers can do what old makers can, and at times with better out put since you have scripting capabilities.

2. Old makers have potential to make games just as good as new makers, but perhaps without some of the fluff, but again it won't make a better game designer. Old makers don't rely on scripts, but more so on actual events and event coding.

The end result. No maker (no matter how old) will make a good game designer. While the new makers offer more potential, the old makers force developers to rely on themselves and not rely on so many add-on scripts, and encourages people to get creative. While graphics have the potential to look nicer with the use of a new maker, I enjoy games with a heavier focus on game play, balance, and story, and as long as those areas are met, I don't care which maker the game is designed on.

The beauty of RGSS3/coding in RM* is that I still use eventing. I have no desire to waste my time doing teleports between maps... I can just copy-paste my map transfer event and be done with it. I also have an easy-to-use database, which is wonderful.

It is not more beneficial to free myself because I have no desire to. I code, but I also want to get around to making the damn game. =P

author=LockeZ

author=Jparker1984

author=masterofmayhem
On topic; do you know why I’m sticking to 2k3? Because it hard. I can’t do all of the crazy stuff with skills and lighting and whatnot like I can with XV. I have to work with what I’ve got.

Then again I’m crazy like that.

i actually understand what you mean. Correct me if I am wrong, but what your saying is. When you doing something really custom in 2k/3, you have strong feeling of accomplishment. As opposed to simply just copying and pasting a script.

If you care more about achieving the feeling of accomplishment than about achieving the actual accomplishment, you are my mortal enemy

Aren’t those two things incursive of one another (and I apologise if I’m using the word incursive wrong). If I make a good game and if other people like it, I feel good about myself and I can then push myself to make an even better game because I know I can. One feeds the other.

But that wasn’t the point you where trying to make was it? What you were trying to say, in the smugist way possible, is that if you make something just to build your own ego and ignore all quality you’re a prick. Basically you shouldn’t feel proud about making crap.

While I’m inclined to agree with you let’s put this in perspective shall we? If you are able to make a complete game that’s more than two hours long you should have a sense of accomplishment, even if the games not so good, because you’ve just done better than 80% of the armature developers out there. In fact I believe it was you LockeZ who said something similar to that effect a while ago.

You’re point is rather moot anyway. Any felling of accomplishment gained from such a feat will erode quickly anyway once the developer hears the cries of the populace telling him what a piece of trash the game is. And if they don’t and act is the there god’s gift to RPG maker community then they’re a narcissistic prick anyway and are best of being ignored completely.

...? I don't drink, so I don't see what your point is?

Perhaps we should get back on topic before things get out of hand.