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)
WHEN TO DECIDE ENOUGH IS ENOUGH?
Posts
Xenomic
1752
Xenomic
View playlists
CloseSo, I've been thinking about this particular subject due to a few folks here and there that I talk to and have help me brainstorm ideas for my game. I have been working on my game for a good 5 years now or so, and I'm only 50% done with it, storywise. Gameplay-wise, I am adding new additions for abilities and skills to characters and whatnot. However, when should one say enough is enough and quit working on one thing?
I have had several people tell me to just quit working in the database already and work on the story, and others say just wait until the story is 100% done before working on the database. I can understand where they're coming from, I really do (though maybe part of the reason I'm not working on the story is because mapping...but I digress), but I feel as though if I do that, then I'll have a mess trying to fix up battle events if I add in new stuff (which I probably will). So I keep working in the database, trying to get everything situated. However, I think I'm at that point where everyone agrees that there's just too much in this game (there's basically 28 playable characters, and about 20 temporary characters, if that says anything. The playables are the ones that I'm basically working with to upgrade abilities and the like), though I myself feel that there's still a bit more that can be done with it.
I have also been suggested to cut the story short, either just outright stop where I am in the story, or just split it into 2 parts. Neither of which I can agree with, mostly because A) It wouldn't feel right if the story just STOPPED where it is and B) Making it so that both parts line up perfectly from save file to save file sounds like a pain to deal with.
So, where should one draw the line on what they do in making a game? Should they work on one thing only until they feel it's done, and then move onto the next part? Or should they split up the work? Note that this game that I am working on is probably going to be my only game I'm going to do in RPG Maker 2k3, and probably in general, so I'm kinda going all out in it with the ideas for abilities and the like.
(For those wondering why I also brought this topic up, my latest blog which is the current changelog for the game should explain everything maybe...)
I have had several people tell me to just quit working in the database already and work on the story, and others say just wait until the story is 100% done before working on the database. I can understand where they're coming from, I really do (though maybe part of the reason I'm not working on the story is because mapping...but I digress), but I feel as though if I do that, then I'll have a mess trying to fix up battle events if I add in new stuff (which I probably will). So I keep working in the database, trying to get everything situated. However, I think I'm at that point where everyone agrees that there's just too much in this game (there's basically 28 playable characters, and about 20 temporary characters, if that says anything. The playables are the ones that I'm basically working with to upgrade abilities and the like), though I myself feel that there's still a bit more that can be done with it.
I have also been suggested to cut the story short, either just outright stop where I am in the story, or just split it into 2 parts. Neither of which I can agree with, mostly because A) It wouldn't feel right if the story just STOPPED where it is and B) Making it so that both parts line up perfectly from save file to save file sounds like a pain to deal with.
So, where should one draw the line on what they do in making a game? Should they work on one thing only until they feel it's done, and then move onto the next part? Or should they split up the work? Note that this game that I am working on is probably going to be my only game I'm going to do in RPG Maker 2k3, and probably in general, so I'm kinda going all out in it with the ideas for abilities and the like.
(For those wondering why I also brought this topic up, my latest blog which is the current changelog for the game should explain everything maybe...)
I've been working on my game for 12 years and I don't even think I'm 10% done with it yet, and I have no intention of stopping.
To quote some advice FinalDragon gave me once when I was struggling with stuff and didn't know what to work on, just do whatever you're able to make progress on. As long as you make a little bit of progress every day, it doesn't matter what part you're working on.
I then proceeded to completely not follow that advice; if I had my game would be done by now. But I've started making progress now!
To quote some advice FinalDragon gave me once when I was struggling with stuff and didn't know what to work on, just do whatever you're able to make progress on. As long as you make a little bit of progress every day, it doesn't matter what part you're working on.
I then proceeded to completely not follow that advice; if I had my game would be done by now. But I've started making progress now!
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'll never be done with the design. Nothing ever becomes perfect. There's no such thing as "finished," only "abandoned." Was it Leonardo da Vinci who kept painting the same painting his entire life?
But I don't think that's bad. If you're not happy with it, then keep improving it.
But I don't think that's bad. If you're not happy with it, then keep improving it.
Shoobinator
662
I would try to work on certain aspects in such a way that you can have whole areas sequentially playable from the start of your game. In other words, don't map the whole game at once because then you couldn't even play your introduction/prologue all the way through. When you're coming up with abilities, it is fine to 100% come up with a starting point for what all your characters' abilities will do, but their specific effects/MP costs may change later due to balance changes. And you can't do balance changes unless you have entire bosses ready to go as well.
My advice on the story is to plan out the whole plot as you are developing your abilities and other gameplay features because what happens in the story could definitely affect the gameplay in many ways (i.e. character leaves party, so you can no longer use their skills on the monsters in the next area). However, I would recommend only writing the specific dialogue for each scene as you come to it. That way you can optimally complete entire playable areas.
Having entire playable areas ready will help motivate you to continue development of your game versus the alternative.
My advice on the story is to plan out the whole plot as you are developing your abilities and other gameplay features because what happens in the story could definitely affect the gameplay in many ways (i.e. character leaves party, so you can no longer use their skills on the monsters in the next area). However, I would recommend only writing the specific dialogue for each scene as you come to it. That way you can optimally complete entire playable areas.
Having entire playable areas ready will help motivate you to continue development of your game versus the alternative.
Xenomic
1752
Well, I do have the entire story in my head ready to go (save for a few spots which I'm still deciding on), so I already know what I want to have happen (and some dungeons I already planned around some characters. For instance, one of beta5's dungeons is set to have No Items as its gimmick, with status tiles and status-using enemies as its subgimmick. One character has the Stock command, which uses Items at the cost of MP instead of using items and bypasses the No Item rule. That same character and one other character also are the best ways to heal statuses, and another is a good way to temporarily prevent statuses). Just have to do the terrible mapping that is required is all.
Ironically enough, I generally write the dialogue as I get to the points in the game. It flows a lot better that way than having it preset for the most part (though I DO have some preset dialogue, but it'll more than likely change in some parts to accomodate the character's personalities).
Several of the balance changes I've made thus far in my Changelog was due to how battles went for the most part, though because of said changelog and changes, I may have to rebalance enemies so that they're actually more of a threat (right now, it's simple enough that you can spam the same skills without much cause for alarm save for some of the troublesome monsters).
Ironically enough, I generally write the dialogue as I get to the points in the game. It flows a lot better that way than having it preset for the most part (though I DO have some preset dialogue, but it'll more than likely change in some parts to accomodate the character's personalities).
Several of the balance changes I've made thus far in my Changelog was due to how battles went for the most part, though because of said changelog and changes, I may have to rebalance enemies so that they're actually more of a threat (right now, it's simple enough that you can spam the same skills without much cause for alarm save for some of the troublesome monsters).
As was said, it doesn't really matter what you work on as long as something's getting done. You shouldn't sacrifice parts of the story or gameplay features if they make the game more enjoyable.
The one thing you want to avoid is having to do stuff over. Like, if you have a skill that uses battle event pages, don't copy it into every battle right away. Make sure it works, let is sit for a while, and see if any updates need made. Nothing's more tedious than fully implementing something only to find out it's flawed or could be better, then having to go back and change/update it all. >_<
Beware of scope creep, too. If you have an idea you're thinking of adding, consider what it really adds to the game. If it's worth its salt, go ahead. If the inclusion seems arbitrary or doesn't add much, then forget it. There's no reason to waste time on pointless additions.
The one thing you want to avoid is having to do stuff over. Like, if you have a skill that uses battle event pages, don't copy it into every battle right away. Make sure it works, let is sit for a while, and see if any updates need made. Nothing's more tedious than fully implementing something only to find out it's flawed or could be better, then having to go back and change/update it all. >_<
Beware of scope creep, too. If you have an idea you're thinking of adding, consider what it really adds to the game. If it's worth its salt, go ahead. If the inclusion seems arbitrary or doesn't add much, then forget it. There's no reason to waste time on pointless additions.
But obviously, pro game developers release games as finished, so there is a standard for finished.
- All plot quests finished. Final boss and ending of sorts.
- All sidequests done (or discarded/hidden if unfinished).
- If there's extra game-plus content, this is all done too.
- No obvious glitches.
- Most of the people involved want to stop working (it's easier, therefore, for a large group to make a finished game than one person since one person can't be outvoted)
Xenomic
1752
@halibabica: Ah yes...I've done that several times before, where I had to go back and fix something with one single battle event over 300+ monster groups. Twas terrible, I gotta say lol...
ubon
66
some relevant advice from derek yu's excellent article on the subject:
I'm not sure how much of those last five years has been spent working on something tangible, but I'll tell you this much: going over the plot in your head does not constitute actually working on it. a lot of people like to use taglines like "five years in the making, extra sugoi" when all they've done for the first three is brainstorm one-liners for the hero to say and doodle in their textbook. I'm not saying that's the case here, but if a majority of your "work" on any given part is just turning over ideas in your head, it's time to move on and come back to it later. which brings me to this one:
it sounds to me like you've been stuck in the database for a good long time and maybe lost sight of where all those bits and pieces are going to go. leave that for now! make some basic layouts for your dungeons, design a town or two, make a little space that you can play through in-game and then decide what scale you'd like to work on. and once you've identified what you might not get much use out of...
this is the biggest thing you should take away from that article, because it sounds like you're brain-deep in feature creep. working at something on and off for five years, it's only natural that your vision is going to drift a little bit. you could give yourself a big push by going through what you have and asking yourself plainly:
"is this absolutely necessary? is there a simple core concept at work here? does it work organically with the rest of the game?"
once you've pared down the bullshit the path ahead should become much clearer. things left over from two or three iterations ago aren't doing you much good, and odds are they're making it look like a much larger job than it has to be.
read the full article if you have the time, it's really quite excellent and comes from a dude with a bunch of projects under his belt.
good luck!
2. ACTUALLY START THE DAMN GAME
Writing your idea down is not starting the damn game. Writing a design document is not starting the damn game. Assembling a team is not starting the damn game. Even doing graphics or music is not starting the damn game. It’s easy to confuse “preparing to start the damn game” with “starting the damn game”. Just remember: a damn game can be played, and if you have not created something that can be played, it’s not a damn game!
I'm not sure how much of those last five years has been spent working on something tangible, but I'll tell you this much: going over the plot in your head does not constitute actually working on it. a lot of people like to use taglines like "five years in the making, extra sugoi" when all they've done for the first three is brainstorm one-liners for the hero to say and doodle in their textbook. I'm not saying that's the case here, but if a majority of your "work" on any given part is just turning over ideas in your head, it's time to move on and come back to it later. which brings me to this one:
9. PUSH FORWARD
Feeling stuck? Push forward. Start working on the next level, the next enemy, the next whatever. Not only is it helpful for motivational purposes, but you want to get a sense for how your whole game will play out. Just like writing - you don’t want to go through it sentence by sentence, making sure every sentence is perfect before you move on. Get an outline down.
it sounds to me like you've been stuck in the database for a good long time and maybe lost sight of where all those bits and pieces are going to go. leave that for now! make some basic layouts for your dungeons, design a town or two, make a little space that you can play through in-game and then decide what scale you'd like to work on. and once you've identified what you might not get much use out of...
13. CUT. IT. OUT.Oh shit, you’re way behind schedule. You have all these ideas but they’ll colonize Mars before you have a chance to implement half of them. Oh woe is you… BUT WAIT!
Well, that’s great, actually! Because now you’re forced to decide what is really important to your game, and what you could cut. The fact is, if we all had unlimited resources and unlimited time, we’d all make the same crappy, meandering everything game and there’d be no reason to play at all. It’s our limited resources and time that forces us to make tight games that feel like they have a purpose.
If you’ve been building upon some core concepts that are provably fun, just keep cutting until you get to the very edge of that core. Everything else is probably just fluff you could do without. Or worse, it’s fluff that’s preventing people from seeing the best parts of your game.
this is the biggest thing you should take away from that article, because it sounds like you're brain-deep in feature creep. working at something on and off for five years, it's only natural that your vision is going to drift a little bit. you could give yourself a big push by going through what you have and asking yourself plainly:
"is this absolutely necessary? is there a simple core concept at work here? does it work organically with the rest of the game?"
once you've pared down the bullshit the path ahead should become much clearer. things left over from two or three iterations ago aren't doing you much good, and odds are they're making it look like a much larger job than it has to be.
read the full article if you have the time, it's really quite excellent and comes from a dude with a bunch of projects under his belt.
good luck!
Xenomic
1752
@mawk: Well, I have a good 10-20 hours worth of gameplay already done for the game, and the game's only 50% done at that (people say this is too long for a RPG, when I say it's only half as long as a RPG really is. 40-50 hours is about how long a RPG's story usually goes, if not slightly less for the story but a little longer on the gameplay. I will say that I do have a tangible, playable "thing" right now (my beta4 has been around for almost 2 years now I think since it was released. I haven't gone through with the storyline since then if that says anything, because I've been trying to fix up bugs, maps, features, etc. so that I would not have to worry about them later).
I guess I COULD be remapping the next area for the times where I cannot think of what to do for abilities or database work aye...there's been plenty of times where I've sat there going "What do I want to give this character?" for hours on end and not actually do anything. Actually, I dilly-dally quite a bit whenever working in the database, especially on something boring (7 months straight for a Weapon Bless and Armor Bless system...there's BOUND to be moments where I dilly-dally).
Yeah, point #3 might be a big one. What I've been doing for the past 2 months (as mentioned) is working in the database, giving characters new abilities (those without a secondary command got one now, everyone is working on getting at least one battle passive, and there's still a lot without an overworld ability. Some even already got upgrades to their secondary commands). The game is long enough to where I think I can actually get away with having upgrades to abilities and whatnot, but there's a looooot of stuff in this game due to it. Problem is, I wouldn't even know what to cut, if anything, from the database if needed be. Recently, I've been trying to do this method on my Blue Magic, but I've been stuck on that (and those that I've brainstormed with on Skype haven't really helped too much with it either). @_@;;
@Kentona: 1 game a month? Crazy talk! Though sounds plausible for some I suppose (but I guess some of the stuff in there does point to just working on games in general too).
I guess I COULD be remapping the next area for the times where I cannot think of what to do for abilities or database work aye...there's been plenty of times where I've sat there going "What do I want to give this character?" for hours on end and not actually do anything. Actually, I dilly-dally quite a bit whenever working in the database, especially on something boring (7 months straight for a Weapon Bless and Armor Bless system...there's BOUND to be moments where I dilly-dally).
Yeah, point #3 might be a big one. What I've been doing for the past 2 months (as mentioned) is working in the database, giving characters new abilities (those without a secondary command got one now, everyone is working on getting at least one battle passive, and there's still a lot without an overworld ability. Some even already got upgrades to their secondary commands). The game is long enough to where I think I can actually get away with having upgrades to abilities and whatnot, but there's a looooot of stuff in this game due to it. Problem is, I wouldn't even know what to cut, if anything, from the database if needed be. Recently, I've been trying to do this method on my Blue Magic, but I've been stuck on that (and those that I've brainstormed with on Skype haven't really helped too much with it either). @_@;;
@Kentona: 1 game a month? Crazy talk! Though sounds plausible for some I suppose (but I guess some of the stuff in there does point to just working on games in general too).
There's probably a lot of stuff you can cut without affecting the juicy core of your gameplay - and if there isn't, you should question how juicy your core really is. Most great games are centered on a few pretty basic concepts or gameplay mechanics (there are many brilliant games with just one) and anything additional just expands on it - but those things can be cut! As long as your core is strong, you'll be fine, and if your core isn't strong, no amount of extra junk is going to make your game better.
Take the original Mario - it's about running and jumping. They made the running and jumping really fun, and added a bunch of obstacles to run and jump over. But you know, if you removed the water levels, moving platforms, Koopa Troopas, secret passages, and the ability to control your horizontal movement, you know what you'd have?
Canabalt.
Canabalt is essentially the very simplest version of Mario, and it's a damn good game. Is it as good as Mario? No, Mario's got all those nice frills and they took longer than 5 days to make it. But Canabalt is a great example of a game stripped to nothing but its core while retaining fun and memorability.
---
If your game is stretching on and on and you really want to release it someday, I'd suggest doing just that - finding your game's core, cutting everything you don't absolutely need, and releasing it. There will be room in your next game for the stuff you had to cut, I promise you. Unless you're only going to make one game, right?
P.S. One game a month ain't even that crazy :P Canabalt was made in 5 days and I'm fairly sure it's made Adam Saltsman a load of money. And people do 48-hour game jams all the time! I made a Zelda-esque boss gauntlet in two days :D
Take the original Mario - it's about running and jumping. They made the running and jumping really fun, and added a bunch of obstacles to run and jump over. But you know, if you removed the water levels, moving platforms, Koopa Troopas, secret passages, and the ability to control your horizontal movement, you know what you'd have?
Canabalt.
Canabalt is essentially the very simplest version of Mario, and it's a damn good game. Is it as good as Mario? No, Mario's got all those nice frills and they took longer than 5 days to make it. But Canabalt is a great example of a game stripped to nothing but its core while retaining fun and memorability.
---
If your game is stretching on and on and you really want to release it someday, I'd suggest doing just that - finding your game's core, cutting everything you don't absolutely need, and releasing it. There will be room in your next game for the stuff you had to cut, I promise you. Unless you're only going to make one game, right?
P.S. One game a month ain't even that crazy :P Canabalt was made in 5 days and I'm fairly sure it's made Adam Saltsman a load of money. And people do 48-hour game jams all the time! I made a Zelda-esque boss gauntlet in two days :D
Xenomic
1752
Yes, I only intend on making this one game (there was plans for a "sequel" based on the bad ending, as well as a side game for this game for 5 of the more important characters so that the player could see what happened during their scenarios). Kinda why I'm tossing what I have into this one game. ^^;
What I tried to do with my game, if I may speak about it, is set it up so that each character has their own defined role in battle, as well as their own sets of strengths and weaknesses which is meant to be used in accordance with other characters as well as specific battles. Pretty much what you'd see in something like Final Fantasy IX actually, since you can't go beyond the characters roles in that game. So essentially, my Knight/Mystic Knight can only use elemental physical attacks, with a couple defensive options, and my Black Mage can only use elemental spells (not of all elements though).
I also tried to set it it up somewhat like Final Fantasy II's level system, where you can level up skills by buying skillbooks (or through storyline/sidequests), and each level adds something new to it (usually more damage for damage skills, longer durations for statuses, or some combination of effects with higher levels). And note, this is with 20 MAIN characters, and about 8-10 optional characters (yes, you have essentially 28-30 playable characters in my game). Yes, I COULD probably cut some of them out, but then the story wouldn't flow right at all in several sections, several gameplay mechanics are lost, etc. Yes, I COULD alter the story to not include those characters as playables, but that would affect what I had set for the story already.
Hopefully that offers a bit more insight as to my method of madness? ^^;?
What I tried to do with my game, if I may speak about it, is set it up so that each character has their own defined role in battle, as well as their own sets of strengths and weaknesses which is meant to be used in accordance with other characters as well as specific battles. Pretty much what you'd see in something like Final Fantasy IX actually, since you can't go beyond the characters roles in that game. So essentially, my Knight/Mystic Knight can only use elemental physical attacks, with a couple defensive options, and my Black Mage can only use elemental spells (not of all elements though).
I also tried to set it it up somewhat like Final Fantasy II's level system, where you can level up skills by buying skillbooks (or through storyline/sidequests), and each level adds something new to it (usually more damage for damage skills, longer durations for statuses, or some combination of effects with higher levels). And note, this is with 20 MAIN characters, and about 8-10 optional characters (yes, you have essentially 28-30 playable characters in my game). Yes, I COULD probably cut some of them out, but then the story wouldn't flow right at all in several sections, several gameplay mechanics are lost, etc. Yes, I COULD alter the story to not include those characters as playables, but that would affect what I had set for the story already.
Hopefully that offers a bit more insight as to my method of madness? ^^;?
Based on this, I've decided to do one last playtest/bugtest (to make sure my game is, in fact, completable) and then release my game as complete and move on to another project.
Oh, but I want to add this or that feature...
(Goes insane with feature crawl)
Just one more...
(Gets carted away by men in white)
Oh, but I want to add this or that feature...
(Goes insane with feature crawl)
Just one more...
(Gets carted away by men in white)
ubon
66
author=Xenomic
Yes, I only intend on making this one game (there was plans for a "sequel" based on the bad ending, as well as a side game for this game for 5 of the more important characters so that the player could see what happened during their scenarios). Kinda why I'm tossing what I have into this one game. ^^;
I don't think this is the best philosophy to have when designing. you shouldn't be tossing every mechanic you can think of into a single game just because you think that's the only game you'll ever make -- for one thing, you may very well be wrong there.
the more important reason, though, is that if you succeed at this, the result is a confused mish-mash of mechanics with no unifying core. what you're doing right now is the literal definition of feature creep, and it's really no wonder you've been at it for five years if you just keep adding more things on.
so open up your game and go to town with the trimming shears. don't forget: "The fact is, if we all had unlimited resources and unlimited time, we’d all make the same crappy, meandering everything game and there’d be no reason to play at all. It’s our limited resources and time that forces us to make tight games that feel like they have a purpose."
On the other hand, there's something to be said for caring enough to put those extra features in.
In the rare event all the extra features work together, you don't have a mish-mash, you have something else. A masterpiece. A masterpiece is what happens when you put art first, by not skimping on stuff, and the art actually says something meaningful. It's generally difficult to pull off, because it's a very fine line of knowing when to stop (too long spent on a project, and you lose perspective).
1 month games are generally junk. They tend to be dime-a-dozen games with neither frills nor originally. 10 year games, when most of those ten years was pipedreaming, are also junk (you tend to start staring at your work, not noticing what's wrong). 10 solid years of work, bugtesting (using several different testers), planning, etc. and then managing to somehow know when to quit before it goes too far, might make a decent game. Or it might make junk still. It's a crapshoot.
Emphasis on the crap part.
In the rare event all the extra features work together, you don't have a mish-mash, you have something else. A masterpiece. A masterpiece is what happens when you put art first, by not skimping on stuff, and the art actually says something meaningful. It's generally difficult to pull off, because it's a very fine line of knowing when to stop (too long spent on a project, and you lose perspective).
1 month games are generally junk. They tend to be dime-a-dozen games with neither frills nor originally. 10 year games, when most of those ten years was pipedreaming, are also junk (you tend to start staring at your work, not noticing what's wrong). 10 solid years of work, bugtesting (using several different testers), planning, etc. and then managing to somehow know when to quit before it goes too far, might make a decent game. Or it might make junk still. It's a crapshoot.
Emphasis on the crap part.
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
If only hard work, time and passion were actually valid replacements for skill. Sadly, they are not.
ubon
66
author=bulmabriefs144
On the other hand, there's something to be said for caring enough to put those extra features in.
In the rare event all the extra features work together, you don't have a mish-mash, you have something else. A masterpiece. A masterpiece is what happens when you put art first, by not skimping on stuff, and the art actually says something meaningful. It's generally difficult to pull off, because it's a very fine line of knowing when to stop (too long spent on a project, and you lose perspective).
you can set this to the most inspirational music you can find, but a masterpiece still isn't created by throwing a load of half-baked ideas into a blender. you're confusing the phrase "giving it your all" with the "I dunno, put it all in there" philosophy that leads to feature creep.
will a game sometimes be something good despite the ineptitude of its creator? absolutely. but does this mean that we should all just act at random in the hopes of triggering this one-a-million chance?
Corfaisus
"It's frustrating because - as much as Corf is otherwise an irredeemable person - his 2k/3 mapping is on point." ~ psy_wombats
7874
I've taken your posts and shaved away what I deemed unnecessary to pinpoint what my outside perspective might help you with.
First of all, you say that you could cut out some of the characters, but it'd affect the storyline. I'd assume this is their behavior or upbringing that makes them important to the story, but I'd also assume that having a small army in your game means you haven't given them much (if any) depth. Face it, NO ONE is going to want to grind 20-30 characters to level 99 because you think it's necessary. Instead, try to cut it down to below 10 and use whatever traits overlap between characters and combine them.
And you speak of these "scenarios" that you feel like throwing in to show the player what's going on behind the scenes. Are these important, or do you just think that they're "super cool"? Besides, do they need to be separate from the main game, or could they be included in the form of cutscenes? I believe 100% that your story is padded down with unnecessary filler if you can't find a solid reason why some of these things can't be added/removed from the plot.
The problem here is that you want to add too much to your game because you feel that you need to live up to the supposed "length" of commercial games. You clearly don't realize the nature of "return on investment" as no one, no matter how amazing you think your game is, is going to appreciate having to force themselves through hell for a game they got for free. This belief that you need this extra padding not only hurts the consistent enjoyment factor of your game, but increases your workload tenfold, resulting in achieving next to nothing over the past five years of development.
You need to ask yourself, "is the player really going to care enough about everything that my game has to offer to put up with all these additional bullshit field abilities? Will having to take time out of the quest to apply these abilities at a moment's notice please or aggravate the player?"
I can appreciate people putting thought into their game, but everyone should be doing that already. Saying that you're making each dungeon significant isn't significant, it's expected.
Do you understand the inherent "sins" of game design? The most damning one being that unreasonable restrictions for the sake of "challenge" (no items) is never a good thing. Couple this with an emphasis on dangers that inflict not only damage but status ailments on the player (which further restricts their freedoms), and you've got a perfect recipe for disaster.
It seems like you want to add something to the game without thinking whether or not its a good idea, just if its something you haven't done before. If you find that other people aren't pursuing a certain idea, you've either struck gold or it's just a terrible, terrible concept. Exploding "save" points and special items that cost something (beyond the monetary cost) to use are two of the worst ideas I've seen you apply.
Even after all of this, instead of considering the challenge that you should have, you sound like you're going to increase the stats of monsters just for the sake of making them "harder", and not considering adding a worthwhile gimmick to their attack patterns that make them slightly more menacing without artificially extending the length of the battle.
------------
Truthfully, I could never (in good conscience) suggest anyone to go against rule 11...
But your game seems to suffer from so much, perhaps rule 14 may just be what the doctor ordered.
1. Take what you've got, cut out what you don't need, compress the things you do, and start fresh. Clear up the mess and start with a brand new list of switches and variables. Yes, that means an entirely new project folder.
2. Keep it organized and only do it once. Revise the concept until the areas and scenes you've created are as good as they can be before moving on.
3. Ask people who you aren't buddy-buddy with to give you strict, honest critique about your game and the concepts you feel like implementing. Remember to listen to every word and don't just shrug it off because it might damage your established vision, as you might actually need some glasses to help you see straight.
For Christ's sake, this has "you" written all over it.
EDIT:
Stay the course and just make the game you are already making. See, that wasn't so hard and didn't require a whole topic devoted to itself. You were clearly going to take this route, anyway.
As a final note, this monstrosity was my initial inspiration for writing my one and only article. As that is, I feel I must thank you for opening my eyes. Now go forth and mak gam.
author=Xenomic
"... as well as a side game for this game for 5 of the more important characters so that the player could see what happened during their scenarios)."
"... each character has their own defined role in battle, as well as their own sets of strengths and weaknesses which is meant to be used in accordance with other characters as well as specific battles."
"... 20 MAIN characters, and about 8-10 optional characters (yes, you have essentially 28-30 playable characters in my game). Yes, I COULD probably cut some of them out, but then the story wouldn't flow right at all in several sections, several gameplay mechanics are lost, etc. Yes, I COULD alter the story to not include those characters as playables, but that would affect what I had set for the story already."
First of all, you say that you could cut out some of the characters, but it'd affect the storyline. I'd assume this is their behavior or upbringing that makes them important to the story, but I'd also assume that having a small army in your game means you haven't given them much (if any) depth. Face it, NO ONE is going to want to grind 20-30 characters to level 99 because you think it's necessary. Instead, try to cut it down to below 10 and use whatever traits overlap between characters and combine them.
And you speak of these "scenarios" that you feel like throwing in to show the player what's going on behind the scenes. Are these important, or do you just think that they're "super cool"? Besides, do they need to be separate from the main game, or could they be included in the form of cutscenes? I believe 100% that your story is padded down with unnecessary filler if you can't find a solid reason why some of these things can't be added/removed from the plot.
author=Xenomic
"... 10-20 hours worth of gameplay already done for the game, and the game's only 50% done at that (people say this is too long for a RPG, when I say it's only half as long as a RPG really is. 40-50 hours is about how long a RPG's story usually goes, if not slightly less for the story but a little longer on the gameplay."
"... "What do I want to give this character?" for hours on end and not actually do anything. Actually, I dilly-dally quite a bit whenever working in the database, especially on something boring (7 months straight for a Weapon Bless and Armor Bless system...there's BOUND to be moments where I dilly-dally)."
"... giving characters new abilities (those without a secondary command got one now, everyone is working on getting at least one battle passive, and there's still a lot without an overworld ability. Some even already got upgrades to their secondary commands)."
The problem here is that you want to add too much to your game because you feel that you need to live up to the supposed "length" of commercial games. You clearly don't realize the nature of "return on investment" as no one, no matter how amazing you think your game is, is going to appreciate having to force themselves through hell for a game they got for free. This belief that you need this extra padding not only hurts the consistent enjoyment factor of your game, but increases your workload tenfold, resulting in achieving next to nothing over the past five years of development.
You need to ask yourself, "is the player really going to care enough about everything that my game has to offer to put up with all these additional bullshit field abilities? Will having to take time out of the quest to apply these abilities at a moment's notice please or aggravate the player?"
author=Xenomic
"Well, I do have the entire story in my head ready to go (save for a few spots which I'm still deciding on), so I already know what I want to have happen (and some dungeons I already planned around some characters. For instance, one of beta5's dungeons is set to have No Items as its gimmick, with status tiles and status-using enemies as its subgimmick. One character has the Stock command, which uses Items at the cost of MP instead of using items and bypasses the No Item rule. That same character and one other character also are the best ways to heal statuses, and another is a good way to temporarily prevent statuses). Just have to do the terrible mapping that is required is all."
"Several of the balance changes I've made thus far in my Changelog was due to how battles went for the most part, though because of said changelog and changes, I may have to rebalance enemies so that they're actually more of a threat (right now, it's simple enough that you can spam the same skills without much cause for alarm save for some of the troublesome monsters)."
I can appreciate people putting thought into their game, but everyone should be doing that already. Saying that you're making each dungeon significant isn't significant, it's expected.
Do you understand the inherent "sins" of game design? The most damning one being that unreasonable restrictions for the sake of "challenge" (no items) is never a good thing. Couple this with an emphasis on dangers that inflict not only damage but status ailments on the player (which further restricts their freedoms), and you've got a perfect recipe for disaster.
It seems like you want to add something to the game without thinking whether or not its a good idea, just if its something you haven't done before. If you find that other people aren't pursuing a certain idea, you've either struck gold or it's just a terrible, terrible concept. Exploding "save" points and special items that cost something (beyond the monetary cost) to use are two of the worst ideas I've seen you apply.
Even after all of this, instead of considering the challenge that you should have, you sound like you're going to increase the stats of monsters just for the sake of making them "harder", and not considering adding a worthwhile gimmick to their attack patterns that make them slightly more menacing without artificially extending the length of the battle.
------------
Truthfully, I could never (in good conscience) suggest anyone to go against rule 11...
11. STOP MAKING EXCUSES FOR STARTING OVER
But your game seems to suffer from so much, perhaps rule 14 may just be what the doctor ordered.
14. IF YOU DO QUIT, SCALE DOWN, NOT UP
1. Take what you've got, cut out what you don't need, compress the things you do, and start fresh. Clear up the mess and start with a brand new list of switches and variables. Yes, that means an entirely new project folder.
2. Keep it organized and only do it once. Revise the concept until the areas and scenes you've created are as good as they can be before moving on.
3. Ask people who you aren't buddy-buddy with to give you strict, honest critique about your game and the concepts you feel like implementing. Remember to listen to every word and don't just shrug it off because it might damage your established vision, as you might actually need some glasses to help you see straight.
For Christ's sake, this has "you" written all over it.
EDIT:
author=XenomicAs was expected, you allowed me to waste my own time attempting to help you in a thread you made specifically asking for help and decided to...masterfully-crafted NOPE essay@Corfaisus: I'll try to go point for point here.
1) Most of the characters I've given depth to (my game is based off of an existing universe already, though not everyone is black and white with their personalities and whatnot) in terms of personality, dialogue, abilities, etc., but not all aye. When you're dealing with 100 characters from one universe (no, I'm not cutting out characters either), it gets a bit rough to define each and every character. Which honestly, I'd expect just about anyone to for the most part (though I know there's some people that can do a pretty damn good job at that). The one thing that I will admit that's lacking is some characters DO lack depth or personality in comparison to others, though that may be due to me not spending any real time with them (I can think of 3-4 characters right off the bat that the player has control over that have no real personality because I don't DO anything with them outside of their arc). But cutting it down to 10 (which I will admit, would save on coding and all) just wouldn't work for the story as it's set up. Though I'm also trying to set it up so that you don't have to really grind at all (hell, in my game for the most part, levels don't really matter too much as far as I'm concerned. It does to SOME degree, don't get me wrong, but not as much as it would in other games).
As for the scenarios that would've been in the sidegame, they are pretty important to the plot. Some are going to be cutscenes yes, though not everything (mostly due to just how many cutscenes I'd probably have to do at this point, but I guess the player doesn't need to know EVERYTHING that happens behind the scenes). Again, they're basically things that happen behind the scenes that you wouldn't even see normally. Though I can agree, there is at least one particular story arc that is pretty fillerish, but without that arc, another story arc makes absolutely no sense, and without THAT arc (which isn't really done well storywise after reviewing it with another person), suddenly having upgraded summons out of nowhere makes no sense. @_@;
2) It's not really that. It's more of a way to spice up and flavor characters, so that they don't feel all the same. Of course, it's inevitable that there's going to be things that are the same between characters, since there's only so much one can do (and how can you make it so that not two separate characters in the entire game DON'T have access to like a Fire-elemental attack or some such? It's just not going to happen). The field abilities (prior to your posting actually) for those who didn't already have one I already decided weren't going to get one (can only come up with so many ideas), and these abilities are things like Double Encounter Rates, Half Encounter Rates, Increased Initiative, and Jeff's repairing ability thing from Earthbound. Things like that...not exactly things like action commands or anything (though I wanted to do that originally, but I dropped it as it'd be too much to change the game core around to match with that). So yeah...if it's about action commands like "man, I need to break this boulder with this character!", then it's not field abilities like those. It's more of a perk for having the character in the party is all.
3) Um...I intended on doing things with their AIs and whatnot, so that they're not just randomly using whatever ability they have (some do have restrictions and conditions, yes, but for the most part, it's just set to fire off any ability it has at whatever priority it's set to). Which I honestly don't think is a good idea on my part. So yeah, I'm not just increasing/decreasing enemy stats. For the most part, the enemy stats are fine. It's just that their attacks and AI patterns (or lack of AI patterns thereof) is what I'm intending to fix up.
And I'm not sure what you're referring to with the special items either. o_O
The exploding save point thing I honestly don't see as being THAT big of a deal. It happens, you just heal up from it. And it's only there twice in the entire game (I made a point to not use it anymore than I already did). Besides, if something is TOO bad, I just get rid of it and try something else more sane (for instance, Bamboo Forest had instant death traps. Those all got removed in favor of just a pitfall that sends you into a forced battle, then spits you out one screen backwards. I think that's a lot fairer compared to what I had before, as well as the puzzles that it originally had).
As for the special restrictions, I honestly don't see that much problem with it myself. It's not like I'm putting in the gimmick, and then going to make everything rapetastically hard. I'm not that cruel after all.
4) Yeeeeah no. I'm not scrapping this game. Seriously, it's not in that bad of a condition to require being scrapped at all. I've brought up my ideas over on other forums and nobody's really objected against most of the stuff I've suggested (I HAVE had objections against some things, and I've taken many peoples suggestions about fixing things up and whatnot).
Now, I'm not trying to start no fight or argument or anything here. Just stating a civil response in all. Just saying. ^^;
author=Corfaisus
... just shrug it off because it might damage your established vision ...
Stay the course and just make the game you are already making. See, that wasn't so hard and didn't require a whole topic devoted to itself. You were clearly going to take this route, anyway.
As a final note, this monstrosity was my initial inspiration for writing my one and only article. As that is, I feel I must thank you for opening my eyes. Now go forth and mak gam.
