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)
HELLO GENERAL ADVICE
Posts
Pages:
1
flik9999
0
flik9999
View playlists
CloseHello so I have been making a project for a few weeks. Now I have some questions around the methods of creating a game.
Firstly is it best to map out the whole game, then make a mechanical shell before thinking about story. Or is it better to make each game section by section eg you make the map for chapter 1 then do the mechanics and story of chapter 1 before moving on to chapter 2.
Secondly what are the pros and cons of making few but large maps in comparison to lots of little maps. I notice that most games use the lots of small maps method, while a few will use big maps.
Thirdly what makes an rpg maker game fun to play? Can you get away with a lame story if you have a really good and original battle system. Vice versa does a boring battle system kill a game that would have a really good story if it wasn't for its bad system.
Thanks
Flik
Firstly is it best to map out the whole game, then make a mechanical shell before thinking about story. Or is it better to make each game section by section eg you make the map for chapter 1 then do the mechanics and story of chapter 1 before moving on to chapter 2.
Secondly what are the pros and cons of making few but large maps in comparison to lots of little maps. I notice that most games use the lots of small maps method, while a few will use big maps.
Thirdly what makes an rpg maker game fun to play? Can you get away with a lame story if you have a really good and original battle system. Vice versa does a boring battle system kill a game that would have a really good story if it wasn't for its bad system.
Thanks
Flik
author=flik9999
Hello so I have been making a project for a few weeks. Now I have some questions around the methods of creating a game.
Firstly is it best to map out the whole game, then make a mechanical shell before thinking about story. Or is it better to make each game section by section eg you make the map for chapter 1 then do the mechanics and story of chapter 1 before moving on to chapter 2.
All of these things differ depending on who you ask, but I'd be glad to give you what works from my experience :DDD
I generally do the map for one section, then the gameplay (make the enemies, treasures, etc for the area) before moving on to the next. I generally also have a loose summary of all the locations and plot points I want in any given games, with notes on stuff I want to put there, before I even start, tho. I usually put it either on paper or on google docs or something like that.
The only time I stray from doing one area at a time is if I'm having writer's block or I feel burned-out. In those cases, I may switch things up and work on a future area.
author=flik9999
Secondly what are the pros and cons of making few but large maps in comparison to lots of little maps. I notice that most games use the lots of small maps method, while a few will use big maps.
I use VX Ace, which will lag out quickly if your map is too big and/or if you have too many events on it. I recently learned of a script that fixes this, but it doesn't play nicely with some of my other scripts, so I'm still sticking to small maps, but back in the RPG Maker 2000 days I did do some really big maps, and those can be fun as long as each part of the map is interesting to explore.
Again, I think it's more a preference on what you like and what you can work with. Some people find a huge empty map intimidating to start, and a smaller map easier to visualize, but some people like tackling a huge map.
author=flik9999
Thirdly what makes an rpg maker game fun to play? Can you get away with a lame story if you have a really good and original battle system. Vice versa does a boring battle system kill a game that would have a really good story if it wasn't for its bad system.
As a player, I need something to keep me playing a game. I've played too many RPGs to slog through a game if both the story and gameplay are bad. But I've played plenty of games where the story is great and the gameplay is bad, or ones where the gameplay is great and the story is bad.
Of course it'd be best if you could do both, but that can be really hard. I think the most important thing is to have something that grabs the player early.
If your plot/characters/storytelling is your strong suit, then give the player a taste of them early to get them interested (it's best if it's an in-universe scene, in my experience, rather than a long scrolling text about the world, as those can be tedious and are overdone in RPGS. If you must have one, I say keep it short and try drip-feeding game world lore as the game goes on).
If someone who loves stories gets a really neat opening hook for your story, or if your characters grab the player, then they'll likely stick around.
Likewise, if gameplay is your strong suite, then get the player into battle ASAP. You can even have a scene in medias res if need-be, starting with a battle that is plot-important. Just make sure to let the player get a taste of the battle system and what sort of fun they can look forward to.
And even if both your battles and story aren't the best, I've played games where I stuck around just because the game surprised me. If you give me a unique setting or unique art-style, I might be compelled to keep going just to feel what its like to exist in that world.
That was a lot of me rambling XD;;; Hope that helps!
Sooz
They told me I was mad when I said I was going to create a spidertable. Who’s laughing now!!!
5354
author=flik9999
Firstly is it best to map out the whole game, then make a mechanical shell before thinking about story. Or is it better to make each game section by section eg you make the map for chapter 1 then do the mechanics and story of chapter 1 before moving on to chapter 2.
This is one of those things where the ultimate answer is "Whatever gets the game done." If that means do things bit by bit so you keep yourself going through the hard parts because you have fun parts ahead, do that. If it means doing things all at once because you like the satisfaction of being DONE with a thing, do that. It's all about what's a good process for you.
If you're not sure, try making a few small games with different processes and see what feels best.
Thirdly what makes an rpg maker game fun to play? Can you get away with a lame story if you have a really good and original battle system. Vice versa does a boring battle system kill a game that would have a really good story if it wasn't for its bad system.
That's another question that you can best answer yourself. Different players like different kinds of games- some people are super into the turn based battle aspects and won't play anything that doesn't follow that model; some people are more interested in the graphics and won't play anything RTP; some people find an engaging story to be the most important aspect.
What's most important as a creator is to figure out what kind of games YOU want to make. Go over the stuff you like, and think about what parts you're drawn to. Think about how they work, what you like, and what aspects don't really work for you.
You'll make your best stuff when it comes from a place of sincere enjoyment, not just "Well, this is what other people like, so..." Not only does that make you less likely to make something good because you don't fully "get" it, you won't have as much fun creating. And in niche areas like this, the fun is the biggest reward you'll get.
Good luck!
Flik
Firstly is it best to map out the whole game, then make a mechanical shell before thinking about story. Or is it better to make each game section by section eg you make the map for chapter 1 then do the mechanics and story of chapter 1 before moving on to chapter 2.
So, for the last game I did, I wrote ideas for the game-world first. However, when it came to opening up RPG Maker, the first priority was developing mechanics and systems, and testing them to make sure they work well enough to not encounter bugs right off the bat. Then, start mapping an actual world-map. Once I had that in the engine, the individual locations were developed on a chapter-by-chapter basis.
Secondly what are the pros and cons of making few but large maps in comparison to lots of little maps. I notice that most games use the lots of small maps method, while a few will use big maps.
I think I tend toward smaller maps because I hate the process of adding detail to maps, even if such detail could be what might draw players in. Though, the less space I have to work with, the less I would need to detail, so...
Thirdly what makes an rpg maker game fun to play? Can you get away with a lame story if you have a really good and original battle system. Vice versa does a boring battle system kill a game that would have a really good story if it wasn't for its bad system.
I enjoy a variety of games, each with their own reasons of why they are "fun". Some time ago, I finished a game of Front Mission 3. It's a turn-based strategy game that involves mechs. Setting them up, and being powerhouses is probably the most fun I have with that game. RPG-wise, I've got five threads here, no wait, make that six.
That's not to say I've not played games where I didn't care for the story, and was more inclined for the gameplay. I want to set up Final Fantasy 8 as the example here. Like, I may not fully understand the nuances of it's plot, but, it's the gameplay that carries me to the end. As for games I would play for the story over the gameplay, I want to say Threads of Fate. Specifically Mint's story because of the humor value. Though, Grandia 2's humor value is pretty high as well, and it is the humor that sees me through.
Darken
3952
author= flik9999
Firstly is it best to map out the whole game, then make a mechanical shell before thinking about story. Or is it better to make each game section by section eg you make the map for chapter 1 then do the mechanics and story of chapter 1 before moving on to chapter 2.
Not sure what you mean by mechanical shell. If your game is an RPG and you know your story is going to fit into an RPG it's probably going to be compatible anyway so either you have a doc with all your cool story ideas or you're making a skeleton first it probably won't matter too much. As far as what order to do things in general I'd probably do things incrementally (chapter to chapter, area to area) but always ask yourself "what is the players goal?" Is it to defeat a boss, talk to an NPC, trigger a cutscene? What are the steps the player needs to do in order to get through an area? The sooner you break that down the easier it might be to visualize the gameplay loops and such.
author= flik9999
Secondly what are the pros and cons of making few but large maps in comparison to lots of little maps. I notice that most games use the lots of small maps method, while a few will use big maps.
Assuming your claim is true (it probably is) I'd surmise that it just works out that it's easier to organize maps that only have what they need. The largest maps in RPGMaker I've seen are usually reserved for later-in-the-game towns that have lots of stuff to do in them and there's a purpose to the congested space. If you're starting out I'd really suggest keeping things as small as possible, not just in terms of map size but scope as well. There's also the amount of maps to consider.
One horror game I made takes place in an old mansion, it's not an RPG but imagine if it was? It'd be really easy to imagine how you can cut things up and add multiple things to do in each area or have story/plot beats happen multiple times in the same room to save on having to make up new areas as you go. What if your RPG took place in just one dungeon and one town? In the next game you can start to expand the scope a bit and work your way up to a large world. People usually ignore this advice though...
author=flik9999
Thirdly what makes an rpg maker game fun to play? Can you get away with a lame story if you have a really good and original battle system. Vice versa does a boring battle system kill a game that would have a really good story if it wasn't for its bad system.
Really ambiguous question to answer, but I'll just cut to my purely personal opinion. All of my favourite RPGMaker games always have a solid story to me. Few RM games that do battle systems well generally do an above average job than a typical SMT game or a less annoying FF4 game. Making a good RPG battle system is hard on its own let alone making one good in RPG Maker. Though there's another aspect to consider: exploration and progression systems. There's always dopamine to be had when beefing up your party members and watching the exp bars go up or finding loot behind a waterfall, I can put up with a meh or poorly balanced battle system if there's something to look forward to.
Ultimately in the broader context of RPGMaker games and what makes them popular*, it's probably due to the story. A good story can mean a lot of things though, doesn't need to be engrossing characters or dialogue, could just be interesting set-pieces and reasons for what you're doing. Which is kind of level design combined with writing in a way, like a DnD dungeon master does. If your game is comedic then you can get by with writing a lot of jokes than having to come up with an epic narrative, if everyone in your story is dead (except your party) then you can just leave behind notes everywhere and call it lore, if your game takes place in just one room then there's probably less to write in general, there's lots of ways to tackle it. You don't have to do what everyone else is doing if you're under-confident with your writing I tend to appreciate when a creator re-thinks how story is displayed and formatted in games.
*: RM games aren't too popular these days so it probably doesn't matter, make what you want
Okay, here's my ten cents
Mapping the entire project before doing anything else is probably a great idea! If you are part of a team and you're the one who's been selected to map the project. For a small project, go for it, but you'll find out doing that that if you were to ever do that for a big project, you'd burn out big time. I've tried it. It doesn't work the way you want it to. Map out a few areas completely and then start adding story and game to those areas. You'll find this is better because it gives you a better idea for you'll need for future maps.
You want to avoid giant map syndrome. I don't blame you. I don't want to suffer from giant map syndrome, either. The easiest way to do this is to make everything out of small maps. That includes breaking up towns and you're world map, but that's probably not the best way to do it if you're making a game with large towns and world map. You need to make sure your maps are either diverse (world maps have distinct regions and climes, town maps have everything a town is supposed to have) or they have a reason for being big (the casino is full of dozens of different types of games or the inn has a dining area and a bar).
I don't know what games you've been playing, but it's hard to find even a AAA game that doesn't have a lame story. You don't need a good story. You need a story we can follow. You need interesting characters. You need likeable characters (you can break this particular rule within reason; there are many good, well liked stories where all of the characters are totally unlikeable and unrelatable. One of my favorites in this category is Notes on the Etgoesian Crisis). The gameplay isn't all you need to focus on but it does need to be challenging and diverse. If a fight goes on too long and you've only got one or two attacks, it gets boring really fast. This is why you find that games also have puzzles scattered throughout, side-quests, minigames (some mandatory for story progression) and you'll find there's a lot of gameplay. A good practice is to start the game with play instead of story because that helps to set the tone of the game as...well...a game. It also psychologically sets the developer to keep putting gameplay in so that they aren't overloading with cutscenes. Remember that you can also tell the story during gameplay. There's nothing stopping you from putting mandatory stopping points in a dungeon where the characters talk to each other, or having them comment on enemies during combat, or having them flee an unknown enemy, or in pursuit of a story relevant MacGuffin. Add puzzles. Add locked doors that can't be opened in an obvious way. Add minigames that block the way. Always think of what's making your characters do what they're doing and always try to find ways to change it up throughout the game and story.
flik9999
Firstly is it best to map out the whole game, then make a mechanical shell before thinking about story. Or is it better to make each game section by section eg you make the map for chapter 1 then do the mechanics and story of chapter 1 before moving on to chapter 2.
Mapping the entire project before doing anything else is probably a great idea! If you are part of a team and you're the one who's been selected to map the project. For a small project, go for it, but you'll find out doing that that if you were to ever do that for a big project, you'd burn out big time. I've tried it. It doesn't work the way you want it to. Map out a few areas completely and then start adding story and game to those areas. You'll find this is better because it gives you a better idea for you'll need for future maps.
Secondly what are the pros and cons of making few but large maps in comparison to lots of little maps. I notice that most games use the lots of small maps method, while a few will use big maps.
You want to avoid giant map syndrome. I don't blame you. I don't want to suffer from giant map syndrome, either. The easiest way to do this is to make everything out of small maps. That includes breaking up towns and you're world map, but that's probably not the best way to do it if you're making a game with large towns and world map. You need to make sure your maps are either diverse (world maps have distinct regions and climes, town maps have everything a town is supposed to have) or they have a reason for being big (the casino is full of dozens of different types of games or the inn has a dining area and a bar).
Thirdly what makes an rpg maker game fun to play? Can you get away with a lame story if you have a really good and original battle system. Vice versa does a boring battle system kill a game that would have a really good story if it wasn't for its bad system.
I don't know what games you've been playing, but it's hard to find even a AAA game that doesn't have a lame story. You don't need a good story. You need a story we can follow. You need interesting characters. You need likeable characters (you can break this particular rule within reason; there are many good, well liked stories where all of the characters are totally unlikeable and unrelatable. One of my favorites in this category is Notes on the Etgoesian Crisis). The gameplay isn't all you need to focus on but it does need to be challenging and diverse. If a fight goes on too long and you've only got one or two attacks, it gets boring really fast. This is why you find that games also have puzzles scattered throughout, side-quests, minigames (some mandatory for story progression) and you'll find there's a lot of gameplay. A good practice is to start the game with play instead of story because that helps to set the tone of the game as...well...a game. It also psychologically sets the developer to keep putting gameplay in so that they aren't overloading with cutscenes. Remember that you can also tell the story during gameplay. There's nothing stopping you from putting mandatory stopping points in a dungeon where the characters talk to each other, or having them comment on enemies during combat, or having them flee an unknown enemy, or in pursuit of a story relevant MacGuffin. Add puzzles. Add locked doors that can't be opened in an obvious way. Add minigames that block the way. Always think of what's making your characters do what they're doing and always try to find ways to change it up throughout the game and story.
Pages:
1
