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)
THE CUSTOMER IS ALWAYS RIGHT - PERCEPTION OF DESIGNER & PLAYER "RESPONSIBILITIES" IN AMATEUR & COMMERCIAL VIDEO GAMES
Posts
Ephiam
8579
Ephiam
View playlists
CloseI just remember being really miffed about that one thing. Lol. Everything else I understood completely, especially with the drawn-out dialogue scenes and what-not. It was sort of a "But you didn't even try!" moment for me while watching that.
I understood what you were saying, but I thought I'd address that one little issue now that it emerged in to the public again.
But yeah, in terms of difficulty in RPG Maker games, they're either too easy, or too hard. Although I don't mind easy games if they're flashy and fun. =P
I understood what you were saying, but I thought I'd address that one little issue now that it emerged in to the public again.
But yeah, in terms of difficulty in RPG Maker games, they're either too easy, or too hard. Although I don't mind easy games if they're flashy and fun. =P
Also, another quick remark : a gameover screen is a very acceptable kind of feedback, but I DO believe that if the player actually ragequits, then you've done something wrong. I doubt that getting enraged is the reason why we play games. Challenge is okay and I don't mind retrying a battle ten times if necessary, but getting frustrated because the cause of my defeat was totally out of my control is not, is never a good thing.
But people ragequit RMN games with so, so, so much less justification than they would a commercial game of equal or inferiority quality just because of the mindset I'm talking about. And then they don't pick it up again because these games are
You want to talk bad game design? Do you want to talk "out of the player's control"? I was replaying through universally praised classic Final Fantasy Tactics and was up to the last Riovanes Castle level (the roof one, with Elmdor, Celia, and Lede) the other day, where you have to protect the retardedly suicidal Rafa from those three and herself. I started the battle and the NPC units ALL had higher Speed and went before me and Rafa idiotically moved toward them and they took her out before ANY OF MY UNITS GOT TO TAKE A SINGLE TURN. Literally, I saw the game over screen before I got ONE TURN OF ACTIONS.
I literally just said "BEST GAME DESIGN EVER" (out loud, TO MYSELF) and then turned off the Playstation.
Making the player lose a battle before getting to DO ANYTHING is worse game design than I've seen in any RM game in recent memory. And so I ragequit. But I calmed down in a day or two, picked the controller back up, threw Sprint Shoes and Green Beret on my Ninja and walked up to Lede and killed her in one preposterously overpowered attack. I took actions to get past the gameover, even though I *did* see the game as at fault, I gave it the benefit of the doubt.
People don't do this with RM games, RM games are always walking on eggshells, and people are always looking for excuses to stop playing. If a game makes any kind of "mistake", real or perceived, in the first 1-15 minutes or even the first hour, a player or worse an LTer might curse it out and rage quit. It's a dog eat dog world.
So, having a grand vision for your design is good, but at some point I think that the feelings (rather than the opinions) of the players should be taken into account.
I think as a default player opinions AND feelings SHOULD DEFINITELY be taken into account...all I'm saying is there ARE exceptions. Players, like anyone else, should be able to be called on their bullshit.
It would not hurt anything to shift our attitude the tiniest bit from "you are doing me a favor by playing my game" end of the spectrum toward the "I am doing you a favor by making my game" spectrum, just the slightest little bit.
But yeah, in terms of difficulty in RPG Maker games, they're either too easy, or too hard. Although I don't mind easy games if they're flashy and fun. =P
I advise inexperienced makers to err on the side of easy in my feedback and reviews...though I wish I didn't have to.
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
Of course people are harsher against RM games, especially at the beginning. When you've paid for a game, you're already invested in it. If it gives you shit, you don't want your previous effort (read: money) to be for nothing, so you keep playing. In a free game, you have to get several hours into the game before you feel the same level of investment. This isn't really a problem with our attitudes or with players' attitudes; it's a simple fact of human nature that we get attached to things we've invested ourselves in. It might be kind of illogical, but decrying it as a problem specific to the RM community is silly.
(Come to think of it, as kind of an ultra-stupid idea, I wonder if having vastly larger game downloads could help "solve" this problem...)
(Come to think of it, as kind of an ultra-stupid idea, I wonder if having vastly larger game downloads could help "solve" this problem...)
I'm actually aware of the psychological factors behind it (investment, value conception) I'm just looking for ways to counteract it.
The download size one is one, ha ha. But it's also ultra-stupid.
While we're in the realms of idiocy, what if there were limited RM points you could use to purchase games to play? Would that actually cause MORE people to play MORE games because of the weirdness of human psychology?
"Well, I've got these points! Might as well spend them."
"Well, I spent the points to DL this game, might as well play it..."
How would you get more points?
Why, by writing reviews of course...
Muahahahahahahaha. It's ingenious.
The download size one is one, ha ha. But it's also ultra-stupid.
While we're in the realms of idiocy, what if there were limited RM points you could use to purchase games to play? Would that actually cause MORE people to play MORE games because of the weirdness of human psychology?
"Well, I've got these points! Might as well spend them."
"Well, I spent the points to DL this game, might as well play it..."
How would you get more points?
Why, by writing reviews of course...
Muahahahahahahaha. It's ingenious.
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
Finally, a use for makerscore
ACEselri
0
Heh... it seems it's a tough crowd. But I'm ok with it, even though I really am inexperienced. It takes one to know one, so that includes me, especially when I come up against games that are more unforgiving than my counter-insults. I can't give out names, since I have a hard time remembering them.
The Halo series is the most memorable case I have. Sometimes in fighting alone in Legendary, there's always a surprise that caught me off-guard. In the first game, there's a Flood that came with a Rocket Launcher... never had it coming when a rocket flew right at me. Second... er... gets very ugly when surrounded in a small space. Third, beam rifles... need I to ask more? That, or a kamikaze grunt that came out in the most inopportune of moments. ODST makes a point that being a sniper is a better way to take out unshielded enemies. Reach... erm... with new weapons, I get treated with more explosions around me, not the other way around.
In all, it is frustrating to do Legendary alone. It gets too much that I needed to take a long break and make a new strategy. I even get headaches trying to fight in the same area for the 30th time or more. The controlled face more abuse with the dirt from my hands (even though I did wash my hands. the skin must have worn out raging through baddies left and right.).
It may not seem much, but I'm making a point that people can blow out from frustration, and everyone has their own levels of tolerance. But from what I hear... they must have little time playing them.
Anyone would like to shift my opinion on a different angle? I'm always in the uncanny gray, so indecisive; never judging things so black-and-white...
The Halo series is the most memorable case I have. Sometimes in fighting alone in Legendary, there's always a surprise that caught me off-guard. In the first game, there's a Flood that came with a Rocket Launcher... never had it coming when a rocket flew right at me. Second... er... gets very ugly when surrounded in a small space. Third, beam rifles... need I to ask more? That, or a kamikaze grunt that came out in the most inopportune of moments. ODST makes a point that being a sniper is a better way to take out unshielded enemies. Reach... erm... with new weapons, I get treated with more explosions around me, not the other way around.
In all, it is frustrating to do Legendary alone. It gets too much that I needed to take a long break and make a new strategy. I even get headaches trying to fight in the same area for the 30th time or more. The controlled face more abuse with the dirt from my hands (even though I did wash my hands. the skin must have worn out raging through baddies left and right.).
It may not seem much, but I'm making a point that people can blow out from frustration, and everyone has their own levels of tolerance. But from what I hear... they must have little time playing them.
Anyone would like to shift my opinion on a different angle? I'm always in the uncanny gray, so indecisive; never judging things so black-and-white...
Crystalgate
694
author=Ephiam
But yeah, in terms of difficulty in RPG Maker games, they're either too easy, or too hard. Although I don't mind easy games if they're flashy and fun. =P
If you make a difficult game, the question is always how you overcome the challenge. In action oriented games you usually have the option of not getting hit. So, if a harder difficulty means enemies take twice as many hits and deal twice as much damage, you will beat it if you get hit only 1/4 as often or less.
There is however no guarantee that you even can overcome the challenge in an RPG with skill. I have seen RM games where almost all damage is mandatory or luck based, you can do little to nothing to mitigate it. If you can out-heal that damage, you do so and the game is to easy. If you cannot out-heal the damage and you can't blitz the boss either, then the game is to hard. So, RPGs without any significant strategic depth are either to hard or to easy.
Anyway, when it comes to feedback and taking feedback into account, I came to think of the Kingdom Hearts series. In the first Kingdom Hearts, people complained about the platforming. Then in Kingdom Hearts II, platforming was all but removed. This lead to people complaining about that instead. Later KH titles restored platforming. This leads me to believe that people who complained about the platforming wanted the platforming to be fixed, not removed.
You need to be very careful both when you give feedback and when you receive feedback. If you give feedback, make sure you're clear on what the problem is. If you receive feedback, be aware that not the problem is not always what the feedback implies it is.
author=LockeZ
I don't see any advantage to stepping away. If I am open to improving it in the future, then it will get better. If I'm not, then it won't. Better games are better than not-better games. So continuing to be willing to improve it in the future is better.
This is dumb. Eventually you have to do other shit with your time, whether its making games or otherwise. Sure, Capcom spent a lot of time perfecting and rereleasing Street Fighter II with like, 5 versions of it, but eventually they had to move on to making Street Fighter Alpha, Street Fighter 3rd Strike, and Street Fighter IV, etc. Sure yeah every now and then they take a look at Street Fighter II and say, fuck around a bit by making an HD version or an online version, but all in all they're doing themselves and then fans a favor by moving on to bigger and better shit.
I think that's a prime example of improving your craft instead of literally working on the same game you already finished years ago.
author=Max McGee
But people ragequit RMN games with so, so, so much less justification than they would a commercial game of equal or inferiority quality just because of the mindset I'm talking about.
I think this is probably an unfair assumption. It's certainly a mindset that exists but I don't think it's as ubiquitous as implied. I can't remember a time where I ever "RAGEQUIT" a game out of frustration. There are a few times that I came very close, but I have suffered through even abominably bad games all the way to the end before. I am sure I am not the only one. I don't think it's fair to think everyone is downloading these games just to look for an excuse to quit and then complain about something to the creator to make it look like they're being helpful.
I HAVE quit games before out of boredom. A game being boring is pretty much the worst thing you can ever have. Even a really bad game can be entertaining.
author=Max McGee
But people ragequit RMN games with so, so, so much less justification than they would a commercial game of equal or inferiority quality just because of the mindset I'm talking about.
Protip: Don't judge a RM game's playerbase by the dudes who regularly post in the forums. The playerbase of an average RM game is much, much, much bigger. Hero's Realm has what, over 10,000 downloads now?
author=Feldschlacht IVauthor=Max McGeeProtip: Don't judge a RM game's playerbase by the dudes who regularly post in the forums. The playerbase of an average RM game is much, much, much bigger. Hero's Realm has what, over 10,000 downloads now?
But people ragequit RMN games with so, so, so much less justification than they would a commercial game of equal or inferiority quality just because of the mindset I'm talking about.
Ah, but herein lies the problem. We will never hear from most of those 10,000 people.The people on the forum are the only people we CAN listen to sometimes.
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
author=Feldschlacht IVauthor=LockeZThis is dumb. Eventually you have to do other shit with your time, whether its making games or otherwise.
I don't see any advantage to stepping away. If I am open to improving it in the future, then it will get better. If I'm not, then it won't. Better games are better than not-better games. So continuing to be willing to improve it in the future is better.
Your miserable human flesh body is not my problem. I have the next several thousand years to perfect my game's design, assuming all goes according to plan.
author=Solitayreauthor=Feldschlacht IVAh, but herein lies the problem. We will never hear from most of those 10,000 people.The people on the forum are the only people we CAN listen to sometimes.author=Max McGeeProtip: Don't judge a RM game's playerbase by the dudes who regularly post in the forums. The playerbase of an average RM game is much, much, much bigger. Hero's Realm has what, over 10,000 downloads now?
But people ragequit RMN games with so, so, so much less justification than they would a commercial game of equal or inferiority quality just because of the mindset I'm talking about.
Well, I think the most accurate way to gauge that is to getting some of those people to speak up and write reviews/give input/figure out an easy way to do both of the former, rather than riding your entire game off the whims of a vocal minority.
author=Feldschlacht IV
Well, I think the most accurate way to gauge that is to getting some of those people to speak up and write reviews/give input/figure out an easy way to do both of the former, rather than riding your entire game off the whims of a vocal minority.
The community has been struggling with this problem for years without great success.
Little boy's got to grow up sometime.
I'm definitely not implying that the administration isn't doing or at least thinking about improving that. However, this community is growing immensely, and good times are ahead for any saavy game creator out here. Once we figure out how to give those thousands of silent game players a voice, man, things are going to be good.
I'm definitely not implying that the administration isn't doing or at least thinking about improving that. However, this community is growing immensely, and good times are ahead for any saavy game creator out here. Once we figure out how to give those thousands of silent game players a voice, man, things are going to be good.
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
Will it? What if they're all just as dumb as the vocal ones?
The vocal ones are generally the ones who are game designers so I really have no problem with them being the ones who give feedback... Since, on average, you would expect them to be better at pointing out accurate issues than people who have no experience making games.
The vocal ones are generally the ones who are game designers so I really have no problem with them being the ones who give feedback... Since, on average, you would expect them to be better at pointing out accurate issues than people who have no experience making games.
Irrelevant. While the consumer isn't always right, they're still consumers of a product and they still deserve to voice their opinions about the product they're consuming as anyone else. If I'm making a game, yes, I'd like to hear from the potential hundreds or thousands of people that play it, for good or ill, and not just a relatively isolated enclave of a much, much smaller audience.
All or none. We're all grown here, we can sort out the rest.
All or none. We're all grown here, we can sort out the rest.
