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)
VISUAL APPEAL VS OTHER CONTENT
Posts
Archeia_Nessiah
View playlists
Close
author=Sauce
As far as writing goes, of course there are different styles. But writing can be bad regardless of its style.
I wouldn't call it a STYLE yet. Since style is about defining who you are and what distinguishes you from other writers/artists/whatever.
My point too is that, just because it's BAD to you doesn't mean it's bad for others. LIKE I gave an example between Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter. A lot would say lol why even bother comparing the two when LotR IS BETTER than HP. But I enjoyed HP better because of it's WRITING STYLE. etc. *points back to her post*
author=Archeia_Nessiahauthor=SauceI wouldn't call it a STYLE yet. Since style is about defining who you are and what distinguishes you from other writers/artists/whatever.
As far as writing goes, of course there are different styles. But writing can be bad regardless of its style.
"As far as writing goes, of course there are different styles. But a specific piece of writing can be bad, regardless of the style its written in."
does that clear up what I mean?
I obviously can't speak for other people's personal tastes on what they value about a game, so I'll just give a brief summary of my thoughts on the importance of each major aspect of an RPG.
Visuals and presentation are what make a person want to play an RPG.
Gameplay is what makes a person want to keep playing an RPG.
Storyline and music are what will make a person want to remember an RPG.
In my opinion, all are important, but the middle, gameplay, is the most important. If a game isn't fun to play, nobody will play through it and it will be forgotten.
Visuals and presentation are what make a person want to play an RPG.
Gameplay is what makes a person want to keep playing an RPG.
Storyline and music are what will make a person want to remember an RPG.
In my opinion, all are important, but the middle, gameplay, is the most important. If a game isn't fun to play, nobody will play through it and it will be forgotten.
I hate to be honest with myself when it comes to this matter but.. Visual consistency and presentation does influence my decision when it comes to Rpgmaker/indie games.
Commercial games I couldn't care less, but for games on here I do for some reason. If someone says look past the graphics, there's something here to play I will check it out most of the time, but if the game gave me a bad first impression, I am more likely to give it a pass then my spare time.
Commercial games I couldn't care less, but for games on here I do for some reason. If someone says look past the graphics, there's something here to play I will check it out most of the time, but if the game gave me a bad first impression, I am more likely to give it a pass then my spare time.
author=Lucidstillness
Visuals and presentation are what make a person want to play an RPG.
Gameplay is what makes a person want to keep playing an RPG.
Storyline and music are what will make a person want to remember an RPG.
In my opinion, all are important, but the middle, gameplay, is the most important. If a game isn't fun to play, nobody will play through it and it will be forgotten.
I agree totally. That's beautiful. To me, anyway.
author=Tau
I hate to be honest with myself when it comes to this matter but.. Visual consistency and presentation does influence my decision when it comes to Rpgmaker/indie games.
I imagine almost everyone does. I know I do. There's too many games to wade through and no incentive to keep playing something. With commercial games, paying money for it may encourage you to give it another go, as to get your money's worth.
Well, that's kind of how real life works too. Appearances do matter, as they affect our initial reception of something or someone. If a person is well dressed and shows good hygiene, one will likely have a better initial response to said individual than if he were badly dressed and unwashed.
Of course, appearances are only the initial criteria for assessment. If a person opens his mouth and starts speaking inanely, it probably won't matter how well he is dressed. The same applies to games; if a game is pretty but lacks an appealing substance, it will succeed in attracting an audience but won't keep it for long.
I remember reading an article about how almost every game from the Playstation era with bad graphics received a negative review simply based on the visuals alone. I'm not sure if that is actually true, but I could believe it. If a game's presentation is bad, many people just won't give it a chance.
Of course, appearances are only the initial criteria for assessment. If a person opens his mouth and starts speaking inanely, it probably won't matter how well he is dressed. The same applies to games; if a game is pretty but lacks an appealing substance, it will succeed in attracting an audience but won't keep it for long.
I remember reading an article about how almost every game from the Playstation era with bad graphics received a negative review simply based on the visuals alone. I'm not sure if that is actually true, but I could believe it. If a game's presentation is bad, many people just won't give it a chance.
In my opinion, all are important, but the middle, gameplay, is the most important. If a game isn't fun to play, nobody will play through it and it will be forgotten.Your logic doesn't follow. You argue that gameplay is the most important because if it's not good, then no one will play it and it will be forgotten. But you also say
Visuals and presentation are what make a person want to play an RPG.In other words, regardless of the quality of the gameplay, no one will want to play it to begin with if no one wants to play it. By this reasoning, visuals and presentation are the most important aspect since no one will ever be able to appreciate the gameplay if they're never driven to play the game.
Gameplay is what makes a person want to keep playing an RPG.
As much as I want to believe that strong gameplay and story are the most important aspects of a game, gameplay and story are infinitely harder to market to players than graphics.
It's a lot harder to pitch a game with "the game is really fun, trust me" than "the game is really pretty, look at this."
@Sailerius - I think you're misinterpreting what he says. I think he is saying visuals make you want to play. But without gameplay even that desire will subside. And in the information age, one can see a pretty game, and then read a review or watch a YouTube video in order to figure out that you don't like the gameplay. Or you can see a game without visual appeal and even if the gameplay is great, you may never feel enticed to look up said visually unappealing title in order to realize that the gameplay is awesome.
So in other words, "all are important, but the middle, gameplay, is the most important"
So in other words, "all are important, but the middle, gameplay, is the most important"
golbez
284
It's not like it takes forever to implement good graphics in a game. I don't think everyone here is expected to create their own music, sound effects and graphics for all of their games so it's pretty minimal effort to find/rip what you need. That's why bad graphics in rpgmaker piss me off because it's such an easy thing to improve. I'm pretty sure that most people here despise RTP for that reason.
Cozzer
0
author=Lucidstillness
Well, that's kind of how real life works too. Appearances do matter, as they affect our initial reception of something or someone. If a person is well dressed and shows good hygiene, one will likely have a better initial response to said individual than if he were badly dressed and unwashed.
Well, there's the fact someone going around badly dressed and unwashed is usually a sign of a poor/unhealty lifestyle. We don't only judge appearances themselves, but also their implications. (It seems off topic but it isn't, I swear, it's all huge metaphor)
@Sailerius
ArmorcladVampireBear_ explained what I meant. While a good presentation is what makes the initial sale, by itself it is not enough for a game to be considered good. A person may buy a bad game with good visuals (assuming that he hasn't read any reviews), but he won't have positive things to say about it after playing it, and will likely tell all his friends to avoid said game. Even if the game company does make some money initially, it is bound to lose money in the long run as information about their product circulates. It is therefore important to have a 'solid package' of all three traits to ensure returning customers, and gameplay is the most critical element in that package. Without good gameplay, nobody is ever going to finish a game, and therefore nobody is going to give it a good review or come back for more.
@Cozzer
True, and in fact our natural generalizing of the people we meet is the source of all prejudice and stigma in the world. Since nobody can take the time to know every individual personally, we judge people by what we can clearly see. Everybody does this, and the only way to temper this reaction and to avoid making unfair generalizations is to become educated; about people, games, or anything else.
Of course, if a person can help to avoid stigma by putting on a good presentation, it is never a bad idea to do so.
ArmorcladVampireBear_ explained what I meant. While a good presentation is what makes the initial sale, by itself it is not enough for a game to be considered good. A person may buy a bad game with good visuals (assuming that he hasn't read any reviews), but he won't have positive things to say about it after playing it, and will likely tell all his friends to avoid said game. Even if the game company does make some money initially, it is bound to lose money in the long run as information about their product circulates. It is therefore important to have a 'solid package' of all three traits to ensure returning customers, and gameplay is the most critical element in that package. Without good gameplay, nobody is ever going to finish a game, and therefore nobody is going to give it a good review or come back for more.
@Cozzer
True, and in fact our natural generalizing of the people we meet is the source of all prejudice and stigma in the world. Since nobody can take the time to know every individual personally, we judge people by what we can clearly see. Everybody does this, and the only way to temper this reaction and to avoid making unfair generalizations is to become educated; about people, games, or anything else.
Of course, if a person can help to avoid stigma by putting on a good presentation, it is never a bad idea to do so.
Cozzer
0
author=Lucidstillnes
True, and in fact our natural generalizing of the people we meet is the source of all prejudice and stigma in the world. Since nobody can take the time to know every individual personally, we judge people by what we can clearly see. Everybody does this, and the only way to temper this reaction and to avoid making unfair generalizations is to become educated; about people, games, or anything else.
Huh... I think you're overdemonizing that.
I mean, theoretically I'm against prejudice as much as everybody, but when you meet 100 new people (or games) and you have the time to get to know better just 2 or 3 of them, you have no choice other than using some kind of prejudices.
So, in these cases, the best you can do is choosing a rational set of prejudices.
If I had to define "the source of all stigmas", it would be people choosing prejudices without any statistical basis.
To be less metaphorical: you cannot deny that in RPGMaker communities there is a relationship between graphic quality and total effort put into the game.
So, if I have time to try 3 or 4 games out of 100 I'll want to maximize my chances they'll be good ones, and graphics will be a factor in that.
I can't believe I'm defending prejudices.
Darken
3952
Why can't everything put into the game determine the quality of the game? Why do people to make buzzwords up like gameplay and use some sort of aspect tier list to judge a game?
@Cozzer
Well, I didn't intend to demonize it, since it is a fact of life. We go with what we know, which is sometimes very little, in favour of just making a complete stab in the dark. I'm the same way; if I have only pictures and a brief blurb to go on, I'll choose the game I think I'd like to play based on that small amount of information. In that way earlier gamers had it much harder; back in the 80s there was no way to reliably know which games were good and which were bad, but today we have tons of information about virtually every game in existence. We can get informed about a game in seconds, so it is much easier to make educated decisions about what we would like to play.
@Darken
Those are just my general guidelines for what I consider a satisfying gaming experience. I can't judge the tastes of anybody else, and some people will place greater emphasis on some areas over others.
I always like to bring up Deadly Premonition in these kinds of discussions, because that is a recent game that earned widely varying reviews. Some people thought it sucked because the gameplay was dated and the visuals choppy, but some people loved it for the intricate story and beautiful music. Neither group is right or wrong, they are just giving their opinions on what they value in a game in a controlled and rational format. It is ultimately up to the player to determine what makes for a fun gaming experience.
Well, I didn't intend to demonize it, since it is a fact of life. We go with what we know, which is sometimes very little, in favour of just making a complete stab in the dark. I'm the same way; if I have only pictures and a brief blurb to go on, I'll choose the game I think I'd like to play based on that small amount of information. In that way earlier gamers had it much harder; back in the 80s there was no way to reliably know which games were good and which were bad, but today we have tons of information about virtually every game in existence. We can get informed about a game in seconds, so it is much easier to make educated decisions about what we would like to play.
@Darken
Those are just my general guidelines for what I consider a satisfying gaming experience. I can't judge the tastes of anybody else, and some people will place greater emphasis on some areas over others.
I always like to bring up Deadly Premonition in these kinds of discussions, because that is a recent game that earned widely varying reviews. Some people thought it sucked because the gameplay was dated and the visuals choppy, but some people loved it for the intricate story and beautiful music. Neither group is right or wrong, they are just giving their opinions on what they value in a game in a controlled and rational format. It is ultimately up to the player to determine what makes for a fun gaming experience.
Cozzer
0
Anyway, I just realized I've gotten away from my real point.
Which is: graphics is not a "marketing tool" for the game, but an important part of the experience, just as gameplay, story and everything else.
Which is: graphics is not a "marketing tool" for the game, but an important part of the experience, just as gameplay, story and everything else.
