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)
WHY IS RPG MAKER STUCK IN THE 20TH CENTURY, GRAPHICS-WISE?
Posts
Max McGee
View playlists
CloseVideo game graphics consistently improve at what is almost an alarming rate.
Likewise, the graphics level of RPG Maker remains consistently behind this curve, but shouldn't it also be improving?
Back when Final Fantasy VII was new, and graphically amazing, RPG Maker 95 let us make games that looked like, say, Dragon Warrior for the NES. (I'm not that familiar with RM95 so correct me if I'm wrong.)
When FFIX was new and graphically amazing, RPG Maker 2000 let us make games that looked like FF6. Minus the Mode-7.
When FFX was new and graphically amazing, RPG Maker 2003 let us make games that looked like FF6. Minus the Mode-7.
Now that we have shit like not just FFXIII (in production), but Bioshock, Fallout 3, Dead Space, Assassin's Creed, and Grand Theft Auto IV.
And RPG Maker VX lets us make games that...basically...still look like FF6. Minus the Mode 7.
So what I am to trying to ask is...why has enterbrain fallen behind? In this era of ludicrously hi-def 3D graphics, why can't we at least make games that look like, say, FFVII?
Likewise, the graphics level of RPG Maker remains consistently behind this curve, but shouldn't it also be improving?
Back when Final Fantasy VII was new, and graphically amazing, RPG Maker 95 let us make games that looked like, say, Dragon Warrior for the NES. (I'm not that familiar with RM95 so correct me if I'm wrong.)
When FFIX was new and graphically amazing, RPG Maker 2000 let us make games that looked like FF6. Minus the Mode-7.
When FFX was new and graphically amazing, RPG Maker 2003 let us make games that looked like FF6. Minus the Mode-7.
Now that we have shit like not just FFXIII (in production), but Bioshock, Fallout 3, Dead Space, Assassin's Creed, and Grand Theft Auto IV.
And RPG Maker VX lets us make games that...basically...still look like FF6. Minus the Mode 7.
So what I am to trying to ask is...why has enterbrain fallen behind? In this era of ludicrously hi-def 3D graphics, why can't we at least make games that look like, say, FFVII?
Because then you would need to know how to model and animate and code the physics and yeah.
I think this is obvious.
I think this is obvious.
If it were 3D I'm pretty sure you'd get 99.99% of the people relying on the RTP for it, since even less people would be able to make their own graphics. At least with 2D you can draw it, pixel it, paint and scan it or something to that effect.
Relyt
1242
Yeah, thus is true. Although the PS versions of RPG Maker have decent graphics, but obviously you're gonna be stuck with RTP.
There are very strict skill set limitations for modern games. There's a reason they're becoming more and more expensive with larger teams to make. It's easier for a one-man show to work with 2D low resolution graphics that are modular/tile-based.
Until polygonal art/editing becomes mainstream or something like that, making RPG Maker 3-D would pretty much annihilate most of the customization of it to people that aren't super dedicated. Completed games would drop to like 1%.
Darken
3952
Heh I am a 3D type of artist since I do a lot of sculptures and pottery, I have tried 3D modeling on the side and it takes a lot of work to make graphics presentable. Do not forget that FF7-9 have many prerendered backdrops (which represent beautiful scenery), made from the same kind of guys who can produce pixar quality cutscenes. Sure many people say drawing every frame takes a lot more work than just making a model and moving it's limbs around. But the tools required for doing 2D art at the lowest requires GIMP or MS Paint and at the very best, Photoshop. Not many people can pick up 3D Max and start making graphics for FF7 clones.
tldr: 3D is more complicated than 2D, go buy rpg maker for the ps1/ps2.
tldr: 3D is more complicated than 2D, go buy rpg maker for the ps1/ps2.
Cop Killa
94
Hey guys, could the answer possibly be that most 3D RPG's suck and that enterbrain is trying to market itself to people who remember what the good old days were like?
Yeah, that's probably it.
Even if I had all the resources at my disposal to make a 3D RPG I wouldn't.
Yeah, that's probably it.
Even if I had all the resources at my disposal to make a 3D RPG I wouldn't.
I would never make an actual RPG in a PS* rm*... I'd just make a hall of bosses and a bunch of PCs to try fighting them with.
Yeah. 3D adds an immense amount of resource workload to a game. It is hard to keep up with that when these engines are designed for single developer games.
Relyt
1242
author=geodude link=topic=3974.msg79834#msg79834 date=1244755651
either that or cheat hard!
What the crap!?
The majority of people using the newest rpgmaker think that copy/pasting a side view battle script makes the difference between whether a game is good or bad. Modeling? Vector math? I don't think so.
Relyt
1242
author=GameOverGames Productions link=topic=3974.msg79871#msg79871 date=1244771147Not that they have much of a choice. RMVX's default is the first thing I've ever seen SUCK and BLOW at the very same time.
The majority of people using the newest rpgmaker think that copy/pasting a side view battle script makes the difference between whether a game is good or bad. Modeling? Vector math? I don't think so.
Beyond the actual lack of 3D resources (you can actually find plenty of royalty free ones if you know where to look), there's also the fact that good 3D level design is a lot harder and much longer process than 2D level design. Sure, I can crank out a decently sized 3D FPS maze in three days, but that's with alternating black and white panels making the walls. Actual creation of detailed terrain and such is much longer. Those little details that can make the level look like less of a eyesore become a huge time sink.
Dark Gaia
3474
I think that the reason is that Enterbrain chooses to go for user accessibility over productivity. They like to market their makers as easy to use, no effort game makers, and 2D allows people to quite easily make something graphically competent.
If it were 3D you'd have to worry about texturing, modelling, anti aliasing techniques etc, and immediately the maker would have a deeper learning curve and less accessibility.
If it were 3D you'd have to worry about texturing, modelling, anti aliasing techniques etc, and immediately the maker would have a deeper learning curve and less accessibility.
