SHORT GAMES, YAY OR NAY?

Posts

Pages: first 123 next last
I have been thinking lately, I always try to make long RPG's, like 10 hours long or more, and I know it's a LOT of work. When I felt I wanted to do something that required less work (mostly due to not enough free time) I thought about making a simpler game but not shorter, like using RTP, or resources from other games, instead of making everything on my own (which is what I usually do).
But lately I've been thinking about making shorter RPG's, game that should take 2 hours to finish, telling a short story, noy always having to save the world, like in movies, where only in 2-3 hours you tell a story, that's my idea.
I know short games work nice, but I haven't seen many short RPG's most people aim to make long, commercial-like games, but I definitely don't have enough work for that.
Would you play a short RPG? Or do you feel that the genre is made for longer games and that in 2 hours you can't really tell a story?
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
I actually think 10 hours is pretty damn short for an RPG.

It has nothing to do with story. You can do an action movie in 2 hours so I'm sure you can tell an RPG story in the same amount of time. But RPGs are designed around building up your characters' strength over time. They're not like action games where you start with most or all of your abilities from the beginning and just have to figure out how they work. There's a progression as the game goes on, the characters evolve and change from simple to complex, and the player has to eventually master the system to win. It's not well suited for a short game. If you end the game when the party is level 3, you might as well not have levels. If you give a level up after every battle, there's no time for the player to adapt, and no chance to actually utilize any of the new strategies he got.

In short, you can make a short game, and you can tell your story, but I'd make it play as an action or adventure game.

This doesn't actually stop people around here, as most RPG Maker games I've played are very short. I can only name a couple that are longer, because the full-length ones are massive projects that take years and most people quit before they finish.
10 hours is short for an RPG very long for FPS.

Do what you want to :-) Personally you shouldn't think in terms of hours. You should think in term of towns & dungeons.
Well I'm thinking about not using levels at all, probably adding some skills after important fights or in important moments of the game. There wouldn't be much strenght building over time. Although I still want it to be played as an RPG.
I'm thinking about 3 dungeons and 2-3 towns, with revisiting places if the story needs you too.
I think I can make it work, I'll try to make a short RPG and see how are the reactions.
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
That sounds very workable. RPG style battles work fine with a short game - RPG style progression is what I feel does not.

If you only have 3 dungeons, I think you really only need 1 town. I think most full length games really only need maybe 3 towns at the most, for that matter.

FF7, for example, would have done just fine with only Midgar, Junon, and Nibelheim. Condense all the minor "tragic towns that Shinra devastated through their neglect" plots into Lower Junon and Lower Midgar. Move everything else that happens in towns either to one of those three towns or to a dungeon. The shops can either get new equipment as the plot progresses, or most equipment can be put in treasure chests.
Decky
I'm a dog pirate
19645
author=LockeZ
That sounds very workable. RPG style battles work fine with a short game - RPG style progression is what I feel does not.

If you only have 3 dungeons, I think you really only need 1 town. I think most full length games really only need maybe 3 towns at the most, for that matter.

FF7, for example, would have done just fine with only Midgar, Junon, and Nibelheim. Condense all the minor "tragic towns that Shinra devastated through their neglect" plots into Lower Junon and Lower Midgar. Move everything else that happens in towns either to one of those three towns or to a dungeon. The shops can either get new equipment as the plot progresses, or most equipment can be put in treasure chests.


Yeah, FF7 turns into a town hopper way too fast.
I'm actually a fan of town hoppers. It's one of things I liked about FF7.

As for making a short game, maybe you could make a few puzzles to slow the game down a little bit. Yeah it can be a short game, but it would make it more mentally stimulating since you'd probably spend a good amount of the game battling mobs instead of building the story.
I've been thinking the same for my game. Really RPG Maker is the easiest game making software but the RPG genre itself is very content reliant, especially if you're using original resources. I'd say go for it and focus the story on whats important rather than filler and sidequests. Get something out there.
There is definitely a place for short games.
http://rpgmaker.net/games/2494/

A good study in short rpg games and progression, in my opinion.
Decky
I'm a dog pirate
19645
author=sbester
http://rpgmaker.net/games/2494/A good study in short rpg games and progression, in my opinion.

And busting one's ass and overflowing Solitayre's AIM screen over the course of 15 hours :D

I love the idea of "short story RPGs" - that is, RPGs that are in that 1 to 5 hour range. It's totally possible to do them right, even if you focus on just combat, boss gauntlets, or a couple puzzle dungeons with bosses.
The Burning Grail was short and I totally loved that game, it's underrated because I don't think it gets the respect and views/downloads it deserves.
The therm "level" is not really from RPG, it's not like a necessity to roleplay a character. The leveling was introduced (or at least I think so) when things like Dungeons&Dragons appeared. Those had the basic rules of character customization, and progression, all packed in the now overused leveling and content "unlocking".
The roleplaying itself is deprecated in most RPGs, since by now it's HARD to make it possible to you to really live it by yourself, by "your own methods and decisions" (like in old roleplaying). In wRPGs, for example, there is always the "select a band" stuff, like in SWKotOR, DragonAge... long list.
So, well, you can make some type of progression. For a short game, it's better to not have a lot of aspects inside the gameplay (make them deep enough, but not fragment "content"). That's the part that makes difference I think. Not if you make the standards in a genre.

It's just my opinion, GL,
Orochii Zouveleki
Puddor
if squallbutts was a misao category i'd win every damn year
5702
I'm bad at keeping my stories short so my games tend to end up long. According to some testers CC is around 10 hours +, (but can be completed quicker- I average 7 hrs) but if I could manage to keep my stories condensed I'd love to do a short game. I also like short games sometimes, but I hate it when they would've been better if longer, and same with long games. I felt some parts of P4 could've easily been condensed.
Adon237
if i had an allowance, i would give it to rmn
1743
If they are worth the experience, yes, but otherwise no.
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=Adon237
If they are worth the experience, yes, but otherwise no.

"I would only play it if it's worth playing." What an incredibly profound and helpful statement.

That was sarcasm.
I've juggled the idea of a sub-game to my main game before. Your flagship project is the 200+ hour epic, but then you have a little 3 hour game that takes place during one of the big events in the epic and involving different characters.
Don't think I'll act on it. But it is an idea and it helps you flesh out your big project as well as build/expand fandom.
Adon237
if i had an allowance, i would give it to rmn
1743
author=LockeZ
author=Adon237
If they are worth the experience, yes, but otherwise no.
"I would only play it if it's worth playing." What an incredibly profound and helpful statement.

That was sarcasm.

Let me rephrase that.
"I would try it out, but after a little bit, if it seems not worth it, I would not play it anymore." But that wouldn't help much either.
It really depends on what type of game it is. If it's a puzzle game, being short won't be a problem.
author=Cray
Would you play a short RPG? Or do you feel that the genre is made for longer games and that in 2 hours you can't really tell a story?

I'd definitively play it. I believe the story is the most important factor of an rpg, so as long as you can get into the characters and feel accomplished about helping them reach their goals, then the length it's not an issue. (and gameplay becomes secondary) ...You seem to have a clear idea of what you want too, so just go for it.

Good luck!
Pages: first 123 next last