YOUR GAME SUCKS

Posts

Craze
why would i heal when i could equip a morningstar
15150
Hey, I have a proposition for you all. I want you to make some games that aren't epic RPGs.

Please.

See, I look at released games like Illarion and I think "Well, some effort was put into this... but I'll never finish it, ever." I also know that most likely I have played the exact same 2k3 game before except with renamed skills and a different variation of the epic storyline. The fantasy epic is a tired genre that requires a developer to make content that probably 10% or less of the people who play it will ever see.

I want you guys to start making small games.

They could be RPGs (Iron Gaia: Virus, Legacy's Rose game (name plz), Generica), they could simply be semi-RPGs (Epic Monster Dungeon Explore! 1+2, Mage Duel, Dungeon Crawler), or they could be... not-RPGs (Befuddle Quest 1+2; INSIDE; Frog, the Collector; Battle City).

You will most likely finish them within a month or two, and people are much more likely to beat a 1-4hr long game.

RM* is more than a DQ/FF6 cloner, it is a tool that SCF can use to get people to play and finish his games. Too bad you're not SCF!

Go forth and finish your games!
halibabica
RMN's Official Reviewmonger
16873
I'm afraid you're asking too much, Craze. See, the thing about the amateur game making community is that most of the people developing games are making the kind of game they like to play. And, unfortunately for you, a lot of them like to make epic RPGs. You can't expect people to change their tastes and preferences just because you're fed up with their favorite genre.

If you're really that bothered by the kind of stuff coming out around here...then maybe you're not looking in the right place for your indi-gaming needs?
^
Basically.


There are so many freeware/indie gaming sites all over the web. If something does not appeal to you on here or on other RPGM websites, then don't play it and look elsewhere. :P
I don't know, I think there's something to be said for what Craze is advocating, and I can't really argue that the epic RPG
author=Craze link=topic=3818.msg76307#msg76307 date=1243080499
requires a developer to make content that probably 10% or less of the people who play it will ever see.
:'(

Then again, Halibabica's also completely right about making the game you want to make. I guess it comes down to what you're personally looking to get out of your project.

And of course, there's always the 'episodic instalments' compromise. An epic adventure always seems that much more attractive when it's in 3-4 hour chunks.


Plus, finishing a short game is less work, which I'm into. Personally... I'm making a fairly long game, and things are way too far down the line for me to just round it off, or anything. But I definitely don't think I'll be making games of any substantial length for a while afterwards.
This has been said time and again, but, as the others have mentioned, it's all about what you want, really. I do agree that things should be made more managable, and as Eike said, if you're making an epic game, then please do it in episodes. It makes things much more managable, and doesn't require that people play it for extended periods of time, or that you make it for extended periods of time.
I think people should make games however they want to, end of. Everyone has so many different opinions on what games should/should not include, how they should be made, what they should be made with, etc., that if you work to try to please everyone, you'll go insane.

No offense to anyone, but I don't "get" topics like these.
I see his point. People are much more likely to play your game if it is smaller (or gimmicky in some way). But the attention for such games is fleeting.

I've done both - completing an epic RPG, and a handful of throwaways. Both are satisfying in their own way, but the epic one I'm still more proud of.
I agree with him. Come on, let's not cop out and go for they 'people can make whatever games they want' argument. I'd like to think that there are a few ambitious people here genuinely wanting to 'try new things.'

And as was said, another route to the 'epic RPG' is episodic installments.

I'm planning to release a small game this Release Something. I've been meaning to for a while.
Yellow Magic
Could I BE any more Chandler Bing from Friends (TM)?
3154
I agree with Yeaster and...

author=Scribble link=topic=3818.msg76319#msg76319 date=1243088219
Come on, let's not cop out and go for they 'people can make whatever games they want' argument.
That's hardly a cop-out.

I'm more of a small-game person myself these days but really there is no point in telling people what they should do like this, because the majority won't have a sudden opinion change due to a forum topic.
halibabica
RMN's Official Reviewmonger
16873
author=Yellow Magic link=topic=3818.msg76321#msg76321 date=1243088509
author=Scribble link=topic=3818.msg76319#msg76319 date=1243088219
Come on, let's not cop out and go for they 'people can make whatever games they want' argument.
That's hardly a cop-out.

I'm more of a small-game person myself these days but really there is no point in telling people what they should do like this, because the majority won't have a sudden opinion change due to a forum topic.
That's just it. There's nothing wrong with small games, and they may get completed more than longer ones, but it all boils down to what you want as a creator vs. what others want as players. If you're looking to please people with the "instant gratification" mindset (an unfortunately growing trend), then make short/simple games. It's not such a big deal when you don't treat it like a popularity contest.
I don't know guys . . . Craze has a good point.

Part of any creative art is to make something that appeals to others while satisfying your own desires to create. With that in mind, you should consider your audience when you are making a game - not just go ahead and make whatever you want. There's a lot to be said about writing music other people like to listen to, for example.

An epic, 40-hour RPG is too much for most of the audience to really get the most out of. Isn't there some value in condensing the experience so that it takes less time to play through?
To quote a really smart dude I know, "Much of success is deciding what NOT to take on."

God knows I probably won't ever want to make an epic rpg again after I'm done my current one.
The issue here is that most newbies aren't interested in the process, only the end result. We all have preferences, but its a lot easier to compromise when we enjoy making games, whether those games are the ones we envisioned or not. For the new developer, there's only the vision and making it enjoyable for everyone is too much to ask when that isn't their primary goal.

You have to want to make something for others, and you have to like doing it. Development hell can happen when one of these is missing.
I don't think the problem is with epic RPGs so much as it is developers who don't have the skill or willpower to actually finish a good game.RPG Maker is a wonderful program; it gives anyone, regardless of background and experience, the ability to make their own amazing masterpiece with little to no effort! Except, it doesn't.

The problem is, most people see it that way. I know I did when I first downloaded XP. But you can't make something amazing without proportional effort, and people advertise their ultimate masterpieces that they ultimately don't have the motivation to finish.

Not that I'm any authority on the matter; this is just what I see happening, and what happened to me with both Catastrophe and Oceanus. I still plan on making an epic RPG, but I'm going to put WAY more effort into it than I ever did with either, and I'm probably going to release episodically.

EDIT: Also, pretty much what Aero just said. tl;dr, it's about the developers, not the games they're making.
I am reposting an old post from an old topic that was discussing RM* game popularity instead of posting something new. It touches on some of the points in this topic.

Five Reasons your game isn't Popular

1) Lack of Disassociation with the Community, unwillingness to Step Outside the Community

As others have said, we are a community of developers, not of players. If you want to get more PLAYERS, be willing to step outside of the community and find them.

This is especially true if you ever want to make a commercial game.

Examples: Last Scenario/Exit Fate/Amanda Fae's games/Laxius Power/The Way


2) Your game isn't episodic

Decent episodic games have some sort of distinct charm that makes them gain a cult following rather quickly, and possibly, an outside community of supporters.

My belief? It's due to the interactive nature of these games. Players contribute suggestions that the makers can very well introduce, and become invested in an ongoing story. A main part of this is player reciprocation - if you respond to your players positively, they are more likely to become invested in your project.

Examples: The Way/Master of the Wind/Quintessence


3) Lack of abstract storytelling methods

This is more about creative storytelling than effective storytelling. Unusual storytelling methods tend to pique players interest more than traditional stories, even if those traditional stories are solid.

Examples: A Blurred Line/The Way

4) No Custom Art Assets

This is more true of the visual arts than the musical, though music can be a part of it. The art/music does not always need to be good. Also, this is generally more of a contributor than an automatic path to popularity.

Examples: Wilfred the Hero/Grave Spirit/Quintessence/Master of the Wind/Aedemphia/LoD/Alter AILA - Genesis/etc.

5) Lack of Charm & Flavor

A strange sense of humor. Weird design choices. Campiness. Quirky characters. While not a sure bet, people tend to remember your game because of these things. This tends to go hand-in-hand with above average writing, but not always.

Examples: Master of the Wind, Ara Fell, Demon Tower, Romancing Walker, Three the Hard Way.

Five things that people seem to think will make their game popular, but really don't:

1) Complicated systems. Scripts. Lots of minigames. Custom battle systems. Custom menus.

2) Non-Fantasy Genres. Sci-Fi/Horror/Post-Apoc/Dystopian/etc. or otherwise.

3) Completion.

4) Strong gameplay.

5) Strong writing.

This is not to say these things hurt. Certainly not. Many of the games above have these traits as well.

Really, the above is only a small set of a greater overall trend. Games that allow the player:

1) Author accessibility. The authors for most (not all) of the games are very public figures that are well-known by their respective communities for being devoted game makers. Even those that are NOT within the rpgmaker community. Almost all of them are not incredibly aggressive advertisers.

Familiarity breeds contempt.

2) Game accessibility. The games are not daunting, or push the gamer out of their worlds. They are inviting and pleasant, and lure us in.

3) Feedback accessibility. This is especially true of episodic games, which tend to gradually improve. People love it when you take their suggestions to heart and see it added to the next release. They feel like they are taking part in the game creation process, and really, they are.

That is all for now.

I think I am going to add 'long games' to the second category. Though that is hardly exclusive, either. =)
halibabica
RMN's Official Reviewmonger
16873
author=brandonabley link=topic=3818.msg76325#msg76325 date=1243091238
I don't know guys . . . Craze has a good point.

Part of any creative art is to make something that appeals to others while satisfying your own desires to create. With that in mind, you should consider your audience when you are making a game - not just go ahead and make whatever you want. There's a lot to be said about writing music other people like to listen to, for example.

An epic, 40-hour RPG is too much for most of the audience to really get the most out of. Isn't there some value in condensing the experience so that it takes less time to play through?
I agree, but only partly so. It all depends on what audience you're expecting to like the game. It's been said countless times that you can't please everybody. I don't think a game should be tailored to a specific audience, but rather that a game should be directed at an audience that would find it interesting. You wouldn't advertise a medieval RPG to a steampunk FPS fanatic. That's all just a matter of taste. Chances are, if the person making the game enjoys it, somebody else would too. Developers should worry more about making their games fun/playable instead of whether forumgoer#56 will like it or not. This kinda ties in with what TooManyToasters said.
How about people just make their games more interesting? You state earlier in your post that you don't want people making "epic" rpgs, then later on you list some RPGs as an example of what to do. (I really hope nobody is "inspired" by Virus' obnoxious camera turrets).

There are many things people can do to make their games stand out. You can't simply tell these guys to STOP MAKING YOUR CRAPPY GAMES, AND GO MAKE OTHER EQUALLY CRAPPY TYPES OF GAMES!
Well, if they're spending years creating an epic RPG, that takes a longer time to 'tweak' and make non-crappy than a shorter game would. The scale of the project can relate to its quality.

And where does this 'don't make games for other people' thing come from? It's not all or nothing. It's not much to ask for creators to step back from their initial "I wanna make a big epic rpg with loads of adventures and heroes and you can have different weapons and ride different dragons and OMG even get an airship" brainwave and think a little.

What annoys me about these kinds of topics is that a gaggle of posters always comes along and says either:

A. PEOPLE CAN MAKE WHATEVER THEY WANT

or

B. THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH CLICHES. IT'S ALL ABOUT EXECUUUUTION

(And Nightblade, these would be the typical answers to your question about people making their games 'more interesting.'

And while A and B are true, it seems like it's just use as a crappy excuse to not think a little when you're creating your game. And Yellow Magic, it's a pity that people won't at least 'consider' changing their opinion when reading topics like this.

I'm not saying the epic RPGs are a problem -- it's just that people just seem to underestimate the task, and if you enjoy making games/generating ideas, then surely you must have a story you could tell that won't take an unrealistic amount of time to create.

I'm dying to create an epic RPG, but I know that I can't just spew out my 'magnum opus' just like that. I'd rather release small, complete projects, gain criticism/feedback, and hone my craft before trying something huge.
author=Scribble link=topic=3818.msg76347#msg76347 date=1243100089
Well, if they're spending years creating an epic RPG, that takes a longer time to 'tweak' and make non-crappy than a shorter game would. The scale of the project can relate to its quality.

I don't remember using the word "tweak". Excessive "use" of "quotation" "marks" is pretty bad on the "internet" it "seems".

Hey guys, do what I did and remake your game seven or eight times! I did it so it must be a good practice, Go; do it now. Now now. Listen to what I have to saaayyyyyyy.


What might work for you, will not work for everyone else. It would be best if people remembered this.

And no, I have no problem with variety.
WIP
I'm not comfortable with any idea that can't be expressed in the form of men's jewelry
11363
I think the problem is that the epic RPGs I have played are pretty boring. You can make an epic RPG in 20 hours, folks. Really.

I want to make an epic RPG. It isn't epic because it takes a month of your life to complete. It is epic because of the scale and presentation. Those are far more important than the time it takes you to beat the game.