GAMES THAT USE RTP GRAPHICS?

short answer: no

less short answer: http://rpgmaker.net/games/82/reviews/ (someone was going to mention it)

slightly longer answer: if you go into a review with this kind of mindsight you have no business reviewing games, rpg maker or otherwise

...No. Reason? I think my title sums it up nicely. ^.^ Seriously, though, I'm a fan of most of the RTP and I've seen (and done) wonders created with it. It's a very cheerful set that's easy enough to edit and hell, it can look just as good as ripped or custom stuff if used well.

Now, badly used RTP is another thing, but then again, so are badly used rips and customs.

If I see a game that uses RTP, it's very unlikely that I'm gonna play it. But if I do play it for some reason, I guess the fact that it uses RTP wouldn't affect my judgement much.

RTP graphics are bad. Many other better sets of graphics are available - even legally freely available for that matter. If the author was not willing to spend this effort to make his or her game look better, that indicates to me a lack of willingness to spend effort on the game overall. That is not always the case, but statistically, it's a very good indicator, and thus it's enough to make me not download the game.

In extremely rare cases I've seen RTP used well to make an entire game. In many more cases I've seen RTP combined with other graphics in a way that worked vastly better than RTP by itself. If your game uses RTP and still looks good, be sure to include lots and lots of great screenshots to convince me of it. Otherwise I'm going to assume the reason you used RTP was that you cared more about it being easy to make than about it being good, and that this is indicative of your overall design methodology.

As for a review, no. Once I'm playing the game, I'm going to judge how good it actually is. But when I'm deciding whether to download it, I have to judge how good it will probably be, and RTP is a big warning flag.

If a game looks good, it looks good regardless of what graphics you're using. Ditto if it looks bad. Granted, your chance of making the game look good is affected by what graphics you're using, but in the end it boils down to how well it looks.

I think the main problem I have with the RTP is its lack of versatility. I look at the RMXP RTP and it simply lacks so many things. There are only a very small number of objects available in each of the tilesets. There aren't enough types of ground, enough types of walls, enough types of anything. There's so little variety. I want each house to look different. I want interesting environments that each look unique and each have a theme.

Where's the RPG Maker XP RTP's factory chipset? Where's the autumn cliffside chipset? Where's the wasteland? Where's the dense forest? Why do all five of the cave chipsets only have three or four types of rocks in them, a few small plants, minecart tracks, and almost no other objects? Shouldn't a cave be able to have wood bridges, stone bridges, dwarven buildings carved into the stone walls, statues, crumbling pillars, vines, holy shrines, ships docked in cove ports, entrances to underground temples, tents, military defenses, piles of treasure, pirate flags, forty different types of small rocks and pebbles, dozens of different-looking stalagmites and other rock formations, walls curved in every possible way, and so much more?

When I say RTP is low quality, it's not the style of the RTP I dislike. It's the content. When you use RTP, your game's content is limited to content that can be expressed in the RTP. It's almost unimaginable that someone would want to create a game that just happens to only need exactly the same objects, monsters, tiles, and other graphics that are in the RTP. Instead, what generally happens is one of the following:
1) You think, "It would be neat and fitting to have a giant underground dwarven city carved into the stone." But the RTP doesn't support that, so you put the city above ground instead. You've sacrificed the integrity of your design for the sake of ease.
2) You think, "It would be neat and fitting to have a giant underground dwarven city carved into the stone." But the RTP doesn't support that, so you attempt to patch together some sort of crude facsimile out of the RTP tiles, and it looks awful. You've sacrificed the quality of your game for the sake of ease.
3) You look over the tilesets you have, and decide what areas your game should have based purely on the resources you have available. Whether other options would be neat or fitting never crosses your mind - you only consider options that are in front of you. You've sacrificed your originality and creativity for the sake of ease.

In this example I used an overall theme, "giant dwarven city." But the same thing applies each time you place a tile. When you put a wooden crate in a building instead of a steel one, you go through the same mental process. When your dwarf enemy is wielding an axe instead of a hammer, you go through the same mental process there too.

When I make maps, I admittedly sometimes *start* with an RTP tileset. When I don't, I start with some other simple tileset. But then when I get to a spot on the map and decide, "it would look good to have a taller vase here," I edit the tileset and add a taller vase to it. And then when I decide, "These vases need to each have a different type of plant in them," I edit the tileset and add 10 vases with different types of plants in them. That's how I build maps. There are other ways, but this is my method, and I like it because I'm never limited to any tileset's contents, so I don't have to sacrifice integrity. It takes a lot longer though. And it's borderline impossible in VX.

Granted, yes, point #3 still happens. I mean, I'm not using 3D graphics for exactly that reason. But I try to do as much as I feel is reasonable. I'm sure different people think different amounts of effort are reasonable. I don't feel that learning how to do 3D modeling is a reasonable use of my time, and I don't feel like taking art classes until I'm able to make hand-drawn backgrounds that don't look like they were scribbled by a ten-year-old is a reasonable use of my time, but someone else might. Or they might already have those skills. I do, on the other hand, feel like downloading hundreds and hundreds of tileset and enemy and animation rips from commercial games and piecing them together is a reasonable use of my time. But someone else might not, and I guess I can't blame them.

When I use VX I just re-color everything independently in Paint.Net using the hue toggle and just mess around, I'm trying to see If I can make an alien universe with blue trees and purple purple cliffs ( which was already included in the rtp ) or just make a mess of the vx rtp.





As mentioned theirs no problem using rtp as long as something either the story, games atmosphere, features, battles system is a little different like some simple recoloring or the default vx rtp can create an alien world, why because blue trees are uncommon in games but its still rtp.



I think its more about if you can use rtp creatively that matters since it will be a disadvantage if your game looks like all the other rpg maker rtp games even if it has alot more to it, the first impression will be ruined but I don't think this is an issue for reviews more of for the players who generally see alot of rtp already.