CIEL FINALLY BITES AND MAKES A TOPIC

I am shit-posting because if some French/German/Czechoslovakian communities (which we barely even interact with!) think less of us because the RMN staff made a shit decision (sorry), without even bothering to take a deeper look into the shedload of great games the English-speaking RM community has spawned/is spawning, that's their problem. To use mainstream pop music as an example - just because, idk, Katy Perry is flaunted all over the front pages of music magazines or big TV stations or whatever does not mean all modern music is shit!

IMO if anyone thinks no one around here's producing quality games anymore they're just jaded/ignorant/both. Idk Ciel it sounds very "things were better back in my day" to me.

Featured games should be representative of the community's finest work and a sign post to the outside world - 'Hey, look at the amazing things we make here, you should come and make amazing things with us!'

If you can't spare a couple of minutes to browse through a website's games library to find games that are actually worth playing/discussing/analysing, you obviously lack qualities needed to make a game in the first place. Maybe in this respect RMN's doing a good job; broadcasting shite to the rest of the world, filtering out budding game makers who make snap decisions on a whole community based on a single game? I wouldn't want them around here, would you? It doesn't take a genius to realise that people make mistakes, even if such mistakes involve showcasing games like Legendary Legend (speaking of which, I'm sure the staff have learnt their lesson and won't be featuring similiar projects anytime soon. We've caused enough of a commotion already I think).

I can't wait to regret this post

author=Lennon
Okay, care to explain why exactly we shouldn't give a fuck? This pissy attitude is the exact problem that Ciel is pointing out. Why the hell shouldn't we care about how other great communities view us? We may not be the sole representation of the English community, but hey, maybe other sites will follow our lead if we get on the ball about being respectable!

Because actively kicking ourselves in the ass is making any effort at being "respectable". Why shouldn't we care how other "great" communities view us? That's a tough answer to give, but... it might have something to do with being able to stand on our own two feet and others opinions are just that?

Silly, possibly related fact: I don't mess around with featured games. I figured that any game that was featured would give me a kick in the paints, if I played them. Kind of like a "Whoa!" moment, if you can understand my meaning. Which is why I was somewhat confused when I saw Fable of Heroes featured a little more than a month after I posted my review. I knew many people heartily disagreed with my less-than-stellar review of it, and I figured there was bound to be a positive review for it, but I didn't think it would attain the "Featured" status. Ever.

Side note: Outside of Fable of Heroes, the only featured games I've played are Avarice and Hero's Realm. I've manged to finish none of these games, but I definitely got a "Whoa!" moment from Avarice.

author=Yellow Magic
If you can't spare a couple of minutes to browse through a website's games library to find games that are actually worth playing/discussing/analysing, you obviously lack qualities needed to make a game in the first place.

I am sorry, but this is a bit unreasonable. In terms of marketing, expecting people, no matter how ditzy or deep they are, to look beyond their initial impression, is asking too much. You judge a book by its cover, we all do. Sales/download impulses are just that... impulses. We don't think about what interests us, we just flock to it like zombies, and I'm not exaggerating. If we have to be convinced or coerced into being interested, it calls upon our critical thinking, which otherwise lies dormant. I have learned (the hard way) that being a "misunderstood indie" is a losing proposition on all fronts, and any marked advantage in production values, balance, mechanics, length, depth, and uniqueness is lost to poor marketing. This is the main driving force behind the "good review, bad performance" phenomenon. (And vice versa) In some instances, games are lucky to even get an initial impression at all, as opposed to hearing about it, hearing its title, and going "well that must suck" and never giving it another thought unless urged by a friend.

author=Creation
(just for the record, nobody was shocked about anything in any French communities that I know of. Ciel, could you let me know which community you're talking about, because I thought I knew them all. I'd be a shame to start an unnecessary conflict based on impressions/language barrier.)

A lot of us didn't know about RMN until YDS dropped by to share her game and she's the only one who mentioned something about Legendary Legend (not in a bad way or anything, she just said what this conversation was all about). When I first dropped by I wasn't that impressed with the game that was selected before this one (not repulsed by it but I didn't make me go "Wow! I need to check this website out!"). I guess what I'm trying to say is that the impact of the featured game might (might) not be as determinant as some of you might think (not saying you're wrong, just a possibility to think about). What I was really impressed with is the design of the website which is the best one I've seen in any communities worldwide.

If members selected the featured game, wouldn't you end up with the same problem? Wouldn't some members complain about the featured game as well? Is it possible to have a system which will satisfy everyone? If not, is the satisfaction of the majority the objective? Would the majority necessarily know which game most deserve to be featured? If a system fails to meet the expectations of the members every once in a while, is it reason enough to get rid of it?

Good luck with this,

Quoted for Awesome - also curious to see the sites where we're being laughed at for having LL up there.


I loved the Featured Games because the staff would find COMPLETED (not demos, not tons of fancy screens) games that were interesting in some way (because you can never please everyone) to make it more visible and give people who would have missed something they might enjoy (note again: if you don't enjoy it, it's okay, someone else likely did, and the world didn't end) a chance to see it.

The purpose was to give an unlikely gem some time to shine, not to show off the "BEST" of what our tiny community has to offer.


I mean, I know we're self-important and all, and RM is SERIOUS BUSINESS - but everyone does have the scope in their heads about just how minor this all is, right? I mean, who are we trying to impress anyway?

Space Funeral having replaced Legendary Legend isn't going to get you a raise, teach your children right from wrong, or let you ace that final in Calc 2.


NOTE: If voting was used for the Featured Game, neither time mine got up there would have happened; both times it was AFTER they went up that I got a huge rash of "Wow! How did you do that?" and "I loved this game, are you making a sequel?" and "Can I have your scripts?" and that popularity spread to other sites not directly through being featured, but because those amazed players went and told someone else.
I'm glad I got a little time in the spotlight before Muse and Ascendence become 6-month fixtures.

author=Fallen-Griever
"Hidden Gem" assumes you're picking gems. You're not.

You forgot to mention that the only reviews that were up prior to featuring LL were Soli and Silv's, both with 4 stars. Yeah.

The featured game's purpose seems to be very malleable when not received well. If its purpose was to elevate obscure titles, why was AAG - that month's obvious smash hit game - featured? Either 'you misunderstand the purpose' is an excuse designed to avoid blame for making a poor selection, or nobody is really sure about what is going on here.

As I previously stated somewhere, I consider AAG to be the odd one out of the bunch. In all honesty, I'm left wondering why AAG was featured since it was a smash hit that was being publicized by everyone and their dog. I implore you to not get in too much about why AAG was featured, though; we're already having way too much drama discussing just the current featured game.

This paragraph essentially says 'no you!'. It's unfortunate that you're unable to reflect on my analysis of the situation and consider why placing that particular title in that particular position may have been a poor idea. That defensiveness I was talking about? Here it is! 'You are all negative human beings therefore we did no wrong!' is a weak argument.

I am not being defensive so much as I am saying that LL was just as much a chance to elicit constructive discussions just as much as any other half-decent game would be. What did we do, though? Instead of writing reviews stating why LL is "such a horrible piece of flaming shit", instead of being civil and mature people, we bitched and whined about the FG system and brought uncalled for fire on the staff members.

To the people that took their time to write constructive reviews to constructively voice their opinion that LL sucks, I praise you and respect you. To everyone else who did not bother to write a review and just decided to soapbox on the forums, I am thoroughly disappointed.

People tend to overlook the 'temporal' implications when pondering the decline of the RM scene. What has gone away is much of the generation who had the advantage of growing up with 16 bit games, a powerful frame of reference for RPG Making. The 2K generation steadily made innovations to bring RM closer to what they knew and loved on the SNES. The VX generation grew up playing Final Fantasy 10. Now that many of the 2K generation's best creators are gone, who is there to teach new RM'ers what possibilities exist in these 2D engines? RMN potentially has the power to teach and guide many new aspiring game makers, as well as inspire experienced, but worn out ones. Whether or not to take the opportunity and strive towards that goal is up to those in charge.

I believe that, reading what you wrote, we both agree that it is the people that have gone away and/or changed for the worse and that the basic infrastructure is still there.

Except it's the staff's duty to make it better. That much should be evident. Unless, of course, they are content with merely keeping the site running in any capacity, without enthusiasm or passion... but as we have seen in the past, that leads to dark places. (saltworld lol)

The irony is that the staff are trying to make it better. They ask us to review more games and contribute more stuff, they pick out hidden gems of games for us to play, they host contests and events geared towards fostering creativity, and a plethora of other things.

What do we do though?

RMN is the only one of those I see any potential in, otherwise I would be on another site posting essays. Like I said, WIP created a framework that should be the envy of the sites you mentioned. There's no reason it shouldn't or couldn't be the brightest star in the sky!

There are certain categories that RMN clearly falls behind in when compared to other RM sites. To name a few:
* RMVX.net, hbgames.org, and rmrk.net are all clearly far beyond RMN in discussing subjects related to computer programming (though RMN certainly has an impressive array of programmers!).
* RMVX.net, RRR, and Salt World all have a dedicated forum/section to RM/game-making resources that RMN simply cannot compete with.

Clearly, thinking that RMN "can trump them all" or that RMN "can be the brightest star in the sky" is not the right mentality to go about it. RMN, just like all the other RM sites, has its own specialties (in our case it's game hosting and articles/tutorials) and weak points. Rather than being arrogant, antagonistic and competitive, why can't we all work together like the RM sites of old for a common good?

Your 'tribal' interpretation completely misses the point. It is not about what THEM FRENCHIES think about RMN,

You should've chosen a better way to convey your thoughts. I am personally nonchalant about what foreign RM communities have to say about us.

it's about ensuring external perception of the site remains positive, that its merits are immediately clear to potential contributors. This is good for its health because a site that is perceived as having quality and passion is attractive to potential members! I don't know how it is possible for any literate human being to come away from my post without understanding that.

Keeping a positive outward image is always a good thing. However, a positive outward image should manifest itself out of the normal, everyday actions of the community, not specific actions designed to artificially improve that image.

I love how this has devolved into a IS TOO! IS NOT! IS TOO! IS NOT! argument

You judge a book by its cover, we all do...

We do? Maybe... but is funny how you hear you entire life not to do it, and you try your damn hardest not to, but at the end you're told to cater to numskulls who do exactly that. Eff them, I say! If someone can't even get past the front page why do you want them here to begin with? So Instead of worrying about "first impressions" you guys should worry about newcomers not having "second thoughts", because with all the drama you manage to pull off I don't know what to think of this site anymore. ;) (half joke)

And I say this as someone who when first found this site thought it was great and payed more attention to the myriad of game profiles and bunch of helpful forum topics rather than whatever was featured at the time (which I can't even remember what it was), so yeah, get over it, fellas.