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)
ABANDONING FEATURES THAT YOU CAN'T GET TO WORK?
Posts
unity
View playlists
CloseI'm having to make a difficult decision and I was hoping to get some feedback from you all. I've been using a CTB battle system with my VX Ace game, and I keep running in to problems dealing with the fact that VX Ace works in "Turns" and my CTB system goes beyond turns while still using them. This is causing problems for me with just about everything battle-related.
I'm able to find work-arounds for most of the problems, but I'm still unable to fix a few things that I really want to work right, like having my side-view battlers display things like the low-HP animation and ailment animations (The CTB system will start them in those animations but they don't seem to want to stay that way).
Given my lack of any sort of scripting ability aside from following instructions in pre-made scripts, I'm thinking I might have to abandon the CTB system for this game, even though it was part of my initial vision for the project.
So I was wondering if others have had to abandon features to get games to work, and how you draw the line between what you want in your game and what you can actually get to work.
I'm able to find work-arounds for most of the problems, but I'm still unable to fix a few things that I really want to work right, like having my side-view battlers display things like the low-HP animation and ailment animations (The CTB system will start them in those animations but they don't seem to want to stay that way).
Given my lack of any sort of scripting ability aside from following instructions in pre-made scripts, I'm thinking I might have to abandon the CTB system for this game, even though it was part of my initial vision for the project.
So I was wondering if others have had to abandon features to get games to work, and how you draw the line between what you want in your game and what you can actually get to work.
I'd assume the line would be right at what you can't get to work. And sometimes some things are just too much work to be worth it even if you can eventually do it. Maybe there would be a good place to draw the line as well~!
I know I've worked way too hard for something comparatively trivial before...
I know I've worked way too hard for something comparatively trivial before...
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
Consider abandoning the smaller features instead of the bigger ones. It seems like battlers that change based on status ailments and the exact timing of the defend command are not nearly as big a deal as having the CTB battle system.
That's the rule I use - if I can't get two things to work together, I decide which is less important. Sometimes you have no choice but to abandon an idea.
For example, I've got an almost flawless recreation of the Chrono Trigger battle system that I'm using in my RMXP game Iniquity and Vindication, except that the caterpillar system that goes with it is screwed up and the allies stop following you if you move diagonally up-right or up-left while hugging a diagonal wall. Despite several hours of screwing with the script I haven't been able to solve the bug. So I have to decide - get rid of the entire battle system, or get rid of the caterpillar system, or get rid of diagonal movement? Uh, well, I might have to think a little bit about the last two choices, but I know I'm not gonna get rid of the battle system over something like that!
That's the rule I use - if I can't get two things to work together, I decide which is less important. Sometimes you have no choice but to abandon an idea.
For example, I've got an almost flawless recreation of the Chrono Trigger battle system that I'm using in my RMXP game Iniquity and Vindication, except that the caterpillar system that goes with it is screwed up and the allies stop following you if you move diagonally up-right or up-left while hugging a diagonal wall. Despite several hours of screwing with the script I haven't been able to solve the bug. So I have to decide - get rid of the entire battle system, or get rid of the caterpillar system, or get rid of diagonal movement? Uh, well, I might have to think a little bit about the last two choices, but I know I'm not gonna get rid of the battle system over something like that!
Skie Fortress
2394
I've thought up, prototyped, and then abandoned countless features from my projects. It's pretty funny actually looking back on it.
My usual thought process is 1. Does this seem like it would be cool and fun? 2. Is it feasible? 3. Will or will it not absolutely destroy the balance of the other features present?
If it passes all three questions, I'll usually toss it in. But sometimes, over the course of development, I'll end up coming up with a better, more streamlined version of the idea. Or something else to replace it entirely. Or other times, I'll end up finding some sort of loophole in my implementation, or otherwise find the feature no longer as fun as I initially thought it to be.
In any of those situations, I'll abandon the feature without question. But I wouldn't scrap the entirety of a working growth or battle system, just the things that might be hampering it. But then again, all situations are different, so there isn't a catch all solution.
My usual thought process is 1. Does this seem like it would be cool and fun? 2. Is it feasible? 3. Will or will it not absolutely destroy the balance of the other features present?
If it passes all three questions, I'll usually toss it in. But sometimes, over the course of development, I'll end up coming up with a better, more streamlined version of the idea. Or something else to replace it entirely. Or other times, I'll end up finding some sort of loophole in my implementation, or otherwise find the feature no longer as fun as I initially thought it to be.
In any of those situations, I'll abandon the feature without question. But I wouldn't scrap the entirety of a working growth or battle system, just the things that might be hampering it. But then again, all situations are different, so there isn't a catch all solution.
RyaReisender
200
Y'know "ability" is not really a limit as you can alwasy learn new stuff (like scripting).
I hate limitations in RPG Makers which is the main reason I'm making games with pure programming the past years.
I hate limitations in RPG Makers which is the main reason I'm making games with pure programming the past years.
author=LockeZ
Consider abandoning the smaller features instead of the bigger ones. It seems like battlers that change based on status ailments and the exact timing of the defend command are not nearly as big a deal as having the CTB battle system.
That's true! Given that I've built my characters around the CTB system (the main character's uniqueness comes from getting to act more due to their AGI, for example), it seems silly to throw the system away because of smaller problems, especially since I've found workarounds for other problems (the defend command, for example, I got to work right).
My thought process was "I've spent so much time on these sprites for the battlers that I'll throw out the battle system before I throw out the side-view battles" but that's not exactly what I should be asking. The fact that your characters don't always kneel when low on HP or have shades on when blind is no reason to throw out the entire battle system. I feel a bit silly for even considering it now.
author=LockeZ
For example, I've got an almost flawless recreation of the Chrono Trigger battle system that I'm using in my RMXP game Iniquity and Vindication, except that the caterpillar system that goes with it is screwed up and the allies stop following you if you move diagonally up-right or up-left while hugging a diagonal wall. Despite several hours of screwing with the script I haven't been able to solve the bug. So I have to decide - get rid of the entire battle system, or get rid of the caterpillar system, or get rid of diagonal movement? Uh, well, I might have to think a little bit about the last two choices, but I know I'm not gonna get rid of the battle system over something like that!
Which just reinforces the point. When I played through the demo of I&V, I was so busy going "OMG Chrono Trigger battles!" that I didn't even notice the smaller issues.
author=Skie Fortress
I've thought up, prototyped, and then abandoned countless features from my projects. It's pretty funny actually looking back on it.
My usual thought process is 1. Does this seem like it would be cool and fun? 2. Is it feasible? 3. Will or will it not absolutely destroy the balance of the other features present?
If it passes all three questions, I'll usually toss it in. But sometimes, over the course of development, I'll end up coming up with a better, more streamlined version of the idea. Or something else to replace it entirely. Or other times, I'll end up finding some sort of loophole in my implementation, or otherwise find the feature no longer as fun as I initially thought it to be.
In any of those situations, I'll abandon the feature without question. But I wouldn't scrap the entirety of a working growth or battle system, just the things that might be hampering it. But then again, all situations are different, so there isn't a catch all solution.
Yeah, I think I'm looking at the wrong things to cut here. And who knows, I might, like you, find better ways of getting things to work down the line.
author=RyaReisender
Y'know "ability" is not really a limit as you can alwasy learn new stuff (like scripting).
I hate limitations in RPG Makers which is the main reason I'm making games with pure programming the past years.
Very true. But just as some people aren't as good at art and music, I've found that I just don't have the knack for programming anything beyond like QBasic or RPG Maker scripts. Which means I'll probably be better suited as a member on a game-making team than a solo developer. But I've got a big drive to create so I'm going to try to get at least a game or three of my own out, even if I have to depend on other people's scripting XD
I abandoned the thought of making a "tool" in respect to both Weird Dreams and Okiku, Star Apprentice, so I can relate. Not that I'm all that good with making puzzles to begin with, but the idea was to make it so players would have to hit switches from a distance.
I gave up for different reasons. For Weird Dreams, it was an event-based game, so I had a very limited time to do stuff to begin with. I eventually realized that had no clue how I was going to actually activate events, so, yeah, throw that idea out the window. With Okiku, Star Apprentice, I think I had a way to activate events, but, getting the bullet over usually blocked tiles while still being able to move across unblocked tiles proved oddly annoying.
I gave up for different reasons. For Weird Dreams, it was an event-based game, so I had a very limited time to do stuff to begin with. I eventually realized that had no clue how I was going to actually activate events, so, yeah, throw that idea out the window. With Okiku, Star Apprentice, I think I had a way to activate events, but, getting the bullet over usually blocked tiles while still being able to move across unblocked tiles proved oddly annoying.
RyaReisender
200
I don't believe in this whole "Some people just can't do X".
For more than 10 years I believed I'm really bad at graphics. I maybe tried a few scribbles in paint and they looked horrible. I couldn't draw on paper or do anything really.
But then I talked with a guy good at art and he told me that he works on a single 20x20 pixel tile more than 1 hour. That's when I realized, that those good artists aren't just so good because they have talent, it's because they invest so much effort into it.
So I went and read several pixel artist tutorial and in the end I could do my own graphics which weren't actually so bad.
Ever since then I believe everyone can learn everything and be good at it.
The only problem that remains is the motivation. Because it's really hard to do something you don't enjoy doing, even if you are good at it.
For more than 10 years I believed I'm really bad at graphics. I maybe tried a few scribbles in paint and they looked horrible. I couldn't draw on paper or do anything really.
But then I talked with a guy good at art and he told me that he works on a single 20x20 pixel tile more than 1 hour. That's when I realized, that those good artists aren't just so good because they have talent, it's because they invest so much effort into it.
So I went and read several pixel artist tutorial and in the end I could do my own graphics which weren't actually so bad.
Ever since then I believe everyone can learn everything and be good at it.
The only problem that remains is the motivation. Because it's really hard to do something you don't enjoy doing, even if you are good at it.
author=RyaReisender
I don't believe in this whole "Some people just can't do X".
You're absolutely right. I said "I just don't have the knack for programming" not "I just can't program, now or ever." Everything I've ever done was not because I had talent but because I kept practicing.
But that in no way means things are at all equal for all people. I busted my butt daily for a decade to have any sort of skill at drawing, and in that ten years I learned what a more talented person could probably pick up in a third of the time. I've spent weeks trying to wrap my head around different sorts of code and learned precious little from it.
author=RyaReisender
The only problem that remains is the motivation. Because it's really hard to do something you don't enjoy doing, even if you are good at it.
Then perhaps a better way to word it on my part is "I don't enjoy programming." I will go forward on all cylinders to get any other part of RPG making done, but I can't seem to get into the programming part of it, again, unless it's something really simple.
Corfaisus
"It's frustrating because - as much as Corf is otherwise an irredeemable person - his 2k/3 mapping is on point." ~ psy_wombats
7874
An important part of growing as a developer is realizing exactly what you're capable of and practicing working within your current limits. After you get some (at least one) piece of solid work done, then look into how you can further hone your skills and use this to create an even better second piece.
A problem with most people starting out is that they want to make an epic with all the bells and whistles that modern commercial games wouldn't even touch, but don't quite realize the amount of work that goes into creating such a thing.
Essentially, read this and find exactly where your current amount of experience drops you into.
A problem with most people starting out is that they want to make an epic with all the bells and whistles that modern commercial games wouldn't even touch, but don't quite realize the amount of work that goes into creating such a thing.
Essentially, read this and find exactly where your current amount of experience drops you into.
RyaReisender
200
What about getting a friend who enjoys scripting and can code a battle system for you? Is that rare in this community?
Corfaisus
"It's frustrating because - as much as Corf is otherwise an irredeemable person - his 2k/3 mapping is on point." ~ psy_wombats
7874
You don't want to be reliant on anyone else to make your game good. It'd be better to learn it yourself.
RyaReisender
200
That would be the case for lack of ability, but what if the developer only likes certain aspects of a game? Shouldn't he stick with the things he enjoys?
Skie Fortress
2394
Corfaisus is correct, but it's also the case that such a situation is rare as well. Generally, you're not going to find someone that will go 'Sure, I'll code this convoluted battle system for you!'. Unless you're throwing money at them.
Rather, you're going to need to hack it together into some semblance of your idea from what you can find if you can't code. Or learn to do it yourself. Or make concessions to the original idea.
Rather, you're going to need to hack it together into some semblance of your idea from what you can find if you can't code. Or learn to do it yourself. Or make concessions to the original idea.
author=Skie Fortress
Corfaisus is correct, but it's also the case that such a situation is rare as well. Generally, you're not going to find someone that will go 'Sure, I'll code this convoluted battle system for you!'. Unless you're throwing money at them.
Exactly. All the people I know in person who do programming are too busy with their jobs or their own projects to bring on board, and I'm a newbie to this site, and even if I wasn't, I'd feel strange going "Hey everyone, I'm looking for someone to invest a lot of time in my game and I don't even have any games released to show my dedication of the craft" and such.
The much simpler solution is to cut smaller things out and make an imperfect but (hopefully) fun game, and try to improve as I go along.
RyaReisender
200
I'd think it would depend on how promising your project is.
Well it's not like I'd script for others, but stuff I really enjoy like game design or battle balance, I'd probably do for someone else if he asks me and can show me he's good in other aspects (like graphics). I mean I'm already helping out for free simply by replying to game design threads or posting suggestions, bug lists and reviews on the game pages. The step to help out by writing a script doesn't seem that big. Then again coding a (graphic-less) battle system in C++ is probably easier than doing one with with RPG Maker scripting, so maybe I just have a wrong impression on the effort required.
But I agree that first having something "done" and then later get help to improve it is the best way unless you want to pay someone for it.
It's just hard with battle system because all the hero growth and monster stats should really depend on the battle system.
Well it's not like I'd script for others, but stuff I really enjoy like game design or battle balance, I'd probably do for someone else if he asks me and can show me he's good in other aspects (like graphics). I mean I'm already helping out for free simply by replying to game design threads or posting suggestions, bug lists and reviews on the game pages. The step to help out by writing a script doesn't seem that big. Then again coding a (graphic-less) battle system in C++ is probably easier than doing one with with RPG Maker scripting, so maybe I just have a wrong impression on the effort required.
But I agree that first having something "done" and then later get help to improve it is the best way unless you want to pay someone for it.
It's just hard with battle system because all the hero growth and monster stats should really depend on the battle system.
I have no idea exactly how complicated fixing any of the things I'd want would actually be, but aside from a status effect that either stuns the enemy too short on one setting and too long on another, all of my issues are with how things look rather than how they affect the battle outcome.
So, hopefully, I can keep making the game without any major problems to how the battle works. I'm just going to have to set some small features aside as currently unworkable.
So, hopefully, I can keep making the game without any major problems to how the battle works. I'm just going to have to set some small features aside as currently unworkable.
I'm sure it's possible with scripting, but in the main editor, everything's done by "turns," and one turn is too short for what I want and two turns is a little too long. Again, it's the CTB that makes this a problem.
Skie Fortress
2394
Are you certain that battle system doesn't have some function to set tick duration via notetags in the editor?
