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)
GAMES AND WHY YOU PLAY THEM
Posts
Mitsuhide_The_Vagrant
View playlists
CloseSimply put, there are two things that cause me to play a game:
1 - I find a game, give a look at some screenshots or maybe read up on some the gameplay mechanics and systems, and straight out buy the game (Basically, this mentality says that I don't think a game is worth playing if it isn't worth owning as well). I never rent a game and I can't really explain why.
And this...
2 - I by chance play a game I didn't research (like if a friend has it and play it out of the blue or something) and it makes me want to go buy and play the game for myself. This recently happened with Dragon Quest 8. Until about a month ago, I'd never played it until I did so at a friends house. Now I'd like to purchase the game for myself I enjoyed it so much.
However, since I'm more a slouch than anything else, I don't do a lot of searching for hidden gem games. I rarely pick up something that isn't mainstream nowadays. (not that I wouldn't like to change that... >.>)
Basically, if I play a game, either on a whim or by a premeditated action (i.e. this game looks cool, I think I'll buy it when it comes out), I won't continue to play it if I'm not having fun doing so.
This is what entertainment SHOULD be about...fun. And I say "should" cause I feel like this is not always the case in today's world anymore. Especially when it comes to things like competition; it's become nothing more than a I SIMPLY HAVE TO WIN thing.
Play games. Have fun doing so. Nothing else should matter.
1 - I find a game, give a look at some screenshots or maybe read up on some the gameplay mechanics and systems, and straight out buy the game (Basically, this mentality says that I don't think a game is worth playing if it isn't worth owning as well). I never rent a game and I can't really explain why.
And this...
post=132991...leads to my second reason, Solitayre.
Also, I have noticed very few people mentioned the word "fun" as being a motivator for why they check out a game. This depresses me.
2 - I by chance play a game I didn't research (like if a friend has it and play it out of the blue or something) and it makes me want to go buy and play the game for myself. This recently happened with Dragon Quest 8. Until about a month ago, I'd never played it until I did so at a friends house. Now I'd like to purchase the game for myself I enjoyed it so much.
However, since I'm more a slouch than anything else, I don't do a lot of searching for hidden gem games. I rarely pick up something that isn't mainstream nowadays. (not that I wouldn't like to change that... >.>)
Basically, if I play a game, either on a whim or by a premeditated action (i.e. this game looks cool, I think I'll buy it when it comes out), I won't continue to play it if I'm not having fun doing so.
This is what entertainment SHOULD be about...fun. And I say "should" cause I feel like this is not always the case in today's world anymore. Especially when it comes to things like competition; it's become nothing more than a I SIMPLY HAVE TO WIN thing.
Play games. Have fun doing so. Nothing else should matter.
post=132954
Anyone who says they do not have time should be set on fire and dragged through the streets while chained to a chariot.
I do not have time to play games.
EnderX
562
My own reasons -
1) At the risk of being dragged through the streets, I don't have that much time. Most days, I spend ~ nine hours working, and 7-8 more sleeping. The rest are broken into a two-hour period between alarm clock and desk, and a five-six hour period during which I try to spend a fair amount of time at the gym or on the track - I'd rather not have a heart attack at age thirty if I can help it. Yes, I technically 'have' the time, but I choose to spend it on something more useful than game dev or game play.
2) My available game hours on weekdays are currently forshortened by the fact that I'm working with a slower computer - I'm hoping to get that remedied soon, and remove this item from the list.
3) The game needs to be available, naturally. More than half the time I'm browsing around the games, I see something that looks like it will be interesting to me, only to see 'no download' on the downloads tab. Unless something happens to draw my attention to it later, I'm likely not going to bother checking on it again. It doesn't matter how good it's -going to be-, if I can't actually play it -now-.
4) I pretty much AM one of those old stick-in-the-mud fogies who doesn't like many of the 'original' game ideas out there - mostly because too many of those appear, to me at least, to be the same old cliches recycled in another environment. I'd prefer to play a game set in stereotypical fantasy realm #814, but with good storyline development and plotting, than something set in the modern world or in space, but otherwise made of the same stuff. If a modern or futuristic setting is required for the storyline, or if the setting enhances the story, that's different - but in far too many cases, it's not and it doesn't.
5) I'm also largely intrigued by evented special systems - having one in your game increases the chances that I will download, so as to sniff around what you did and see how it works. I admire complex and well-done scripting, but scripts are, effectively, plug-and play without necessarily showing effort, while an evented system, even if less flashy, shows that the developer didn't just say 'hey, I like that' and plop it into the game - s/he either made it, or cared enough about the idea to find someone else to make it if his/her talents fell outside of event programming. That being said, a lazy evented system is one of the quickest ways to get me to drop a game from play.
6) The old Catch-22 of reviews. I'm less likely to play something that doesn't have a review than something that does, and less likely to play those with reviews by those who I have disagreed with in the past than those I have agreed with. The only exception to that is someone who I have disagreed with giving a game a bad review specifically for the reasons I disagree with them.
7) Nostalgia factor. I pretty much grew up with the SNES, and didn't get a Playstation until the PS2s had already been on the market for a while. In many ways, RM games seem to be our attempts to recreate the bright parts of the consoles that we grew up with - and I appear to have trouble relating to things based after my own 'glory daze' with the SNES in other people's games.
8) Nitpick factor. My biggest time investment with someone else's game has been one I was running beta testing on, in both the original and expanded releases. I think I've managed to get myself stuck in permanent nitpick mode as a result - it doesn't matter if the game has been out in full and final version for over a year, I play it as though a beta tester. It's not just mere 'entertainment' at that point. Part of the problem here is that when I'm in beta mode, I prefer trying to hash things out in real-time discussion, something I'm not sure how to do with most of the people here. And if I can't, I'm likely to simply set the game aside, and may never come back to it.
9) Unlock factor. Related to the above; if I run into even a minor bug, I'm going to want to go in and fix it. If I discover that someone's game is locked so I can't open it in the editor, I'll delete the download.
Admittedly, the above is pretty much all my own quirks. Don't know that this giant list will help any for other people.
1) At the risk of being dragged through the streets, I don't have that much time. Most days, I spend ~ nine hours working, and 7-8 more sleeping. The rest are broken into a two-hour period between alarm clock and desk, and a five-six hour period during which I try to spend a fair amount of time at the gym or on the track - I'd rather not have a heart attack at age thirty if I can help it. Yes, I technically 'have' the time, but I choose to spend it on something more useful than game dev or game play.
2) My available game hours on weekdays are currently forshortened by the fact that I'm working with a slower computer - I'm hoping to get that remedied soon, and remove this item from the list.
3) The game needs to be available, naturally. More than half the time I'm browsing around the games, I see something that looks like it will be interesting to me, only to see 'no download' on the downloads tab. Unless something happens to draw my attention to it later, I'm likely not going to bother checking on it again. It doesn't matter how good it's -going to be-, if I can't actually play it -now-.
4) I pretty much AM one of those old stick-in-the-mud fogies who doesn't like many of the 'original' game ideas out there - mostly because too many of those appear, to me at least, to be the same old cliches recycled in another environment. I'd prefer to play a game set in stereotypical fantasy realm #814, but with good storyline development and plotting, than something set in the modern world or in space, but otherwise made of the same stuff. If a modern or futuristic setting is required for the storyline, or if the setting enhances the story, that's different - but in far too many cases, it's not and it doesn't.
5) I'm also largely intrigued by evented special systems - having one in your game increases the chances that I will download, so as to sniff around what you did and see how it works. I admire complex and well-done scripting, but scripts are, effectively, plug-and play without necessarily showing effort, while an evented system, even if less flashy, shows that the developer didn't just say 'hey, I like that' and plop it into the game - s/he either made it, or cared enough about the idea to find someone else to make it if his/her talents fell outside of event programming. That being said, a lazy evented system is one of the quickest ways to get me to drop a game from play.
6) The old Catch-22 of reviews. I'm less likely to play something that doesn't have a review than something that does, and less likely to play those with reviews by those who I have disagreed with in the past than those I have agreed with. The only exception to that is someone who I have disagreed with giving a game a bad review specifically for the reasons I disagree with them.
7) Nostalgia factor. I pretty much grew up with the SNES, and didn't get a Playstation until the PS2s had already been on the market for a while. In many ways, RM games seem to be our attempts to recreate the bright parts of the consoles that we grew up with - and I appear to have trouble relating to things based after my own 'glory daze' with the SNES in other people's games.
8) Nitpick factor. My biggest time investment with someone else's game has been one I was running beta testing on, in both the original and expanded releases. I think I've managed to get myself stuck in permanent nitpick mode as a result - it doesn't matter if the game has been out in full and final version for over a year, I play it as though a beta tester. It's not just mere 'entertainment' at that point. Part of the problem here is that when I'm in beta mode, I prefer trying to hash things out in real-time discussion, something I'm not sure how to do with most of the people here. And if I can't, I'm likely to simply set the game aside, and may never come back to it.
9) Unlock factor. Related to the above; if I run into even a minor bug, I'm going to want to go in and fix it. If I discover that someone's game is locked so I can't open it in the editor, I'll delete the download.
Admittedly, the above is pretty much all my own quirks. Don't know that this giant list will help any for other people.
J-Man
4684
Like a few of the chaps mentioned here earlier...
My need to play other peoples games has dropped incredibly, mostly because a lot of the games that show promise end up being cancelled, or released til' the end of time. And then there is a lot of the games that I just go... okay, moving on... next... next... next... and so on.
And when there isn't a game I wanna play, it just makes me focus my attention to my own games. Maybe I'm just being impatient or whatever when I say "hurry up and release it damn it." but I know people need to put in effort and all that other stuff into making their games, or else the game will turn out to be crap.
My need to play other peoples games has dropped incredibly, mostly because a lot of the games that show promise end up being cancelled, or released til' the end of time. And then there is a lot of the games that I just go... okay, moving on... next... next... next... and so on.
And when there isn't a game I wanna play, it just makes me focus my attention to my own games. Maybe I'm just being impatient or whatever when I say "hurry up and release it damn it." but I know people need to put in effort and all that other stuff into making their games, or else the game will turn out to be crap.
So, after taking time to read this thread (time I could've used to play an RM game!) I guess I can chime in:
- Mog is right: playing an RM game using a controller hooked up to a TV is super fun - way more fun than can be explained in a rational way. Bonus points if the TV is also an old CRT.
- If the forums (and arguably 95% of the active community) are developers and all about developers, why are we bitching about game playing? Game playing isn't and shouldn't be an expectation from each other. I think we should expect each other to work on our games, getting help and feedback and motivation where appropriate but otherwise celebrate our "craft" (gamemaking (vs. gameplaying, of course)).
- realize that we are a niche within a niche here (RPGs being a niche within Gaming and amateur RPGs within RPGs) so be glad if 5 people play your game.
- Mog is right: playing an RM game using a controller hooked up to a TV is super fun - way more fun than can be explained in a rational way. Bonus points if the TV is also an old CRT.
- If the forums (and arguably 95% of the active community) are developers and all about developers, why are we bitching about game playing? Game playing isn't and shouldn't be an expectation from each other. I think we should expect each other to work on our games, getting help and feedback and motivation where appropriate but otherwise celebrate our "craft" (gamemaking (vs. gameplaying, of course)).
- realize that we are a niche within a niche here (RPGs being a niche within Gaming and amateur RPGs within RPGs) so be glad if 5 people play your game.
Crystalgate
694
I can think of two things that attracts me more than others, appealing characters and fun.
Appealing characters seems straightforward, but it really isn't. You can have characters with complicated and tragic back-stories and character development where they grow as they encounter both hardships and joy, but it does not guarantee appealing characters. In fact, promises of either means very little to me when evaluating your characters. What I really look at is characterization.
Good characters aren't dependent on their back-story or current goal to convey anything meaningful (although those things can definitely help), they can show their personalities and feeling (unless they are supposed to not show their feeling of course) well even if the plot currently isn't facing what specifically concerns them. Show is also the key-word, you shouldn't have to be blatant about it unless it's appropriate for the situation. For example, a kind character should behave in a kind way, not just go and suggest the kind course of action every time the party has a choice to make.
While this can be hard to show in a project without spoiling anything, I can often get a good impression by reading a 3-5 line summary of the character.
Next is fun. For RPGs, a great way to make it fun is a good phasing between story and gameplay. Don't have too long sections of cutscenes, but don't have to long dungeons either. I will understand that the story cannot always be conveniently spaced out, but poor balance between story and gameplay should be an exception rather than a rule.
Then there's always paying attention to detail and making sure it's fun. If the player is expected to talk with townspeople and explore the town, it has to be fun. The townspeople should have something interesting to say and there should be interesting things to see and find. Do the same reasoning for every other lengthy aspect of the game. Battles is usually one of them so I go a bit more in-dept with them.
A very simple rule for fun battles is; they should demand or at least encourage different strategies. All the character customization, limit breaks and any other features are useless if the same strategy is used for the majority of the battles. Other than that, anything you implement should be implemented with great care. If you want a limit break system, carefully consider how the limit breaks affects battles and make sure the player can utilize them in a meaningful way.
The best way to show that the game will be fun is to explain what you're adding and not just give me a list of features. One well thought trough idea is better than dozens of haphazardly thrown together ones.
Appealing characters seems straightforward, but it really isn't. You can have characters with complicated and tragic back-stories and character development where they grow as they encounter both hardships and joy, but it does not guarantee appealing characters. In fact, promises of either means very little to me when evaluating your characters. What I really look at is characterization.
Good characters aren't dependent on their back-story or current goal to convey anything meaningful (although those things can definitely help), they can show their personalities and feeling (unless they are supposed to not show their feeling of course) well even if the plot currently isn't facing what specifically concerns them. Show is also the key-word, you shouldn't have to be blatant about it unless it's appropriate for the situation. For example, a kind character should behave in a kind way, not just go and suggest the kind course of action every time the party has a choice to make.
While this can be hard to show in a project without spoiling anything, I can often get a good impression by reading a 3-5 line summary of the character.
Next is fun. For RPGs, a great way to make it fun is a good phasing between story and gameplay. Don't have too long sections of cutscenes, but don't have to long dungeons either. I will understand that the story cannot always be conveniently spaced out, but poor balance between story and gameplay should be an exception rather than a rule.
Then there's always paying attention to detail and making sure it's fun. If the player is expected to talk with townspeople and explore the town, it has to be fun. The townspeople should have something interesting to say and there should be interesting things to see and find. Do the same reasoning for every other lengthy aspect of the game. Battles is usually one of them so I go a bit more in-dept with them.
A very simple rule for fun battles is; they should demand or at least encourage different strategies. All the character customization, limit breaks and any other features are useless if the same strategy is used for the majority of the battles. Other than that, anything you implement should be implemented with great care. If you want a limit break system, carefully consider how the limit breaks affects battles and make sure the player can utilize them in a meaningful way.
The best way to show that the game will be fun is to explain what you're adding and not just give me a list of features. One well thought trough idea is better than dozens of haphazardly thrown together ones.
post=133047
- realize that we are a niche within a niche here (RPGs being a niche within Gaming and amateur RPGs within RPGs) so be glad if 5 people play your game.
kentona, I like you, but: fuck you. This is the worst advice you have ever given.
post=133050I am a realist. If you are making these kinds of games more because you expect a lot of people to play them rather than enjoying the process, I think you'll end up disappointed and bitter.post=133047kentona, I like you, but: fuck you. This is the worst advice you have ever given.
- realize that we are a niche within a niche here (RPGs being a niche within Gaming and amateur RPGs within RPGs) so be glad if 5 people play your game.
It's called "making something worthy of not being shut in to just incestual and immature communities." You can have fun AND release a game outside of RRR. Really, you can! Maybe. It requires effort, though, and solid presentation, and quality, and all that jazz. Maybe some originality, too.
I simply don't understand why anybody would make a game just to release it to five people, or make a game not good enough to actually show (one-hours/joke games aside).
Some people just enjoy creating things for the sake of creating them. Do you go 'HEY EVERYONE LOOK AT THIS LOOK AT THIS' for every piece of artwork you create?
Spending twenty minutes sketching a dude is different from putting months - even years - of work into a game. And yeah, if I spend more than an hour on a piece of art I tend to show it to somebody. Protip: look at all those crazy folks on deviantart. A painter most likely shows almost all of his unsold art at shows and galleries.
Sure, there are folks who are like "I just want to fiddle in 2k3 and not really do anything." That's fine, I just don't really care about them. But, Feld... are you really planning on not showing off Chronolo - oh wait 2k3 hehehehehhe
Sure, there are folks who are like "I just want to fiddle in 2k3 and not really do anything." That's fine, I just don't really care about them. But, Feld... are you really planning on not showing off Chronolo - oh wait 2k3 hehehehehhe
post=133061
I really like making games.
And you show them off constantly. You have, what, a combined total of 500 Generica: TNG blogs/screenshots?
post=133062I know my audience. Notice that most of the Generica TNG screens have comments posted on them?post=133061And you show them off constantly. You have, what, a combined total of 500 Generica: TNG blogs/screenshots?
I really like making games.
Is there really anything wrong with showing off screens constantly? This IS a game development site after all...
post=133058
I simply don't understand why anybody would make a game just to release it to five people, or make a game not good enough to actually show (one-hours/joke games aside).
I second that. I wouldn't want to spend months on a game just so I could think "that was fun to make". Or to have half a dozen people saying "oh... cool game".
So, yes, I think worrying about people not playing games is very legitimate.
I'd agree with kentona, even though his games have probably been played and enjoyed more than any others here lol. None of my personal friends really play RPGs, so I don't get to show my games off. So even one comment from an internet user saying they played and enjoyed my game is pretty cool to me. It's just a hobby, anyway.
