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)
ARE CLASSIC RPGS STILL A VIABLE OPTION ?
Posts
kentona
View playlists
Close
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=Lezales
It seems that as it's really simple to do such games (pretty easy battle system, not that hard to reproduce graphics) people are moving away from that to stay original or fresh. I can understand that. People includes, either by scrips or eventing, some fancy systems, developed battle systems.
OK, here's the problem. I don't understand how "fancy systems and developed battle systems" is in any way something that implies "non-classical RPG". It's one thing to make your game wildly different and weird, but the way you put it sounds like you expect games to have identical gameplay. Games have to be different from each-other in order to be new games. I will gladly play a game that uses a similar battle system to FF4, but if I'm playing something that uses all the same systems as FF4 it's not going to feel like a new game. It's going to feel like it's just FF4 with different enemies and different party members, and the reason it's going to feel that way is because that's literally all it is. It's literally the same game.
Even first-person shooters, the genre with the least innovation of any genre ever, all have some basic differences from each-other. You don't have to come up with wildly unusual RPG subgenres, but you do have to make a new game instead of just re-releasing someone else's game with a different plot and a few balance changes. This is why DBS games with nothing but the default systems are hated on.
Everybody needs to play Radiant Historia, "the SNES game we never got."
Also, Rudras. EVERYBODY PLAY TREASURE OF THE RUDRASit's way better than FFVI
Also, Rudras. EVERYBODY PLAY TREASURE OF THE RUDRAS
I could not get into Rudras. It had good concepts, but uh...the battle system kinda blew, the story had no scale and made no sense in the middle and the end was a real cop out, and FFVI was WAY more epic and memorable. I beat Rudra all the way and its just a bunch of novel ideas mashed together in the most incoherent game of all time. Yes the Mantra system was a cool idea in concept but that is literally it.
You don't need a fancy, overcomplicated battle system to make fights fun. But copy-pasting old battle systems means copy-pasting their old flaws as well. Stuff like completely random targeting by the enemies (better pray they don't target your mage) and useless spells can be improved or removed as necessary. Turn-based systems are still very workable and fun, if a little thought is put into them.
There's a chance it can succeed, but you're appealing to a smaller and smaller niche as you lessen the gameplay. If by "minimum" gameplay you mean you want to spend as little time as possible on it, you're hurting your chances. If instead you mean simplistic gameplay without a million crazy twists and unnecessary systems, then of course you can succeed.. There is elegance in simplicity, and it can lead to amazing fun.
I'm just wondering how far a game can get in the RPG category with the minimum package for gameplay and maximum place for the rest.
There's a chance it can succeed, but you're appealing to a smaller and smaller niche as you lessen the gameplay. If by "minimum" gameplay you mean you want to spend as little time as possible on it, you're hurting your chances. If instead you mean simplistic gameplay without a million crazy twists and unnecessary systems, then of course you can succeed.. There is elegance in simplicity, and it can lead to amazing fun.
Shinan
4314
author=LockeZ
Even first-person shooters, the genre with the least innovation of any genre ever, all have some basic differences from each-other.
Not to derail the thread massively and turn it into "one of those" threads. But it's funny how a genre with the least innovation of any genre ever has pushed the video game medium so far in and into completely new areas in the years it has existed.
author=Darken
o boy tabletop wizard appears to give these pearl harbor bomber lovers a quick lesson on what 'role playing' actually means, heh... punks.
In a serious tone: if you look at the hero's realm game profile you'd probably get an idea of how classic JAPANESE CONSOLE LIGHT/maxmcgee rpgs are received here. Though nowadays HR has conquered its own audience as that "biggest/bestest DQ3/FF5 clone done in rpgmaker" (this title will always be held). In the end you should just make whatever you want, and uh at least add some personal aspects to it to make it more original. Like have a reason why someone would play your game over Dragon Quest # or something.
Me personally I cannot stand the "look how oldschool I am!!" vibes a lot of retro RPGs do nowadays. I think there's this one indie rpg called cthulu saves the world or w/e where it pulls every gaming reference from the book to pander to whoever remembered what an NES was. I mean yeah you'll probably get an audience if you pull the right strings but uh idk, a lot of oldschool RPGs seem to be made by atari ghosts rather than human beings who use their own imagination.
What is an atari ghost?
Also, what exactly are you saying about my RPGs? : )
author=Max McGee
What is an atari ghost?
I think he's referring to people who intentionally create games meant to invoke nostalgia, like Super Meat Boy and a lot of indie games do nowadays - pixelated graphics, chiptunes, that whole lot.
And wow, I didn't even notice that someone had already referenced Cthulu Saves the World...
Fact is, for indies it's usually easier to make pixelated graphics than it is to make realistic ones, and trying to go realistic with pixel graphics is a lot harder than making it stylistic and, yes, obviously nostalgic. Graphics aside, Cthulu took the old-school battle system and flipped it sideways with two simple tweaks: Recovery of all HP after battle, and the damage scaling.
It's a typical Dragon Quest-ish battle system, you have a party of four, you have attacks, you have spells/techs. You can also spend two character's turns for a combo ability, but that's hardly a huge leap into innovation. The punch comes when you see the damage scaling meter. Every turn you spend in battle, enemies do 10% more damage, meaning that 10 turns in, each enemy is doing twice as much damage. This alone makes you nervous and makes it clear that you can't afford to dick around in battle, or get into one of those Final Fantasy loops of attack, heal, attack, heal until boss is dead. In addition to this, your HP is recovered to full after battle, and the battles are balanced accordingly - meaning each battle is dangerous (some more than others based on monster groups, of course). Battles require just enough thought to be engaging without being horribly tedious and overlong, which sucks when you are exploring a dungeon.
JUST A THOUGHT
I think the healthiest game making attitude would be this; instead of steering people towards making games that we would rather see, we should help them make their game the best game it could be.
In addition to this, your HP is recovered to full after battle, and the battles are balanced accordingly - meaning each battle is dangerous
I attempted to balance Mage Duel this way.
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=Max McGee
What is an atari ghost?
It is one with no connection to the new life of this age of games; it is merely an echo of games dead and gone.
One could say that by looking back to the past we are doomed to repeat the same mistakes over and over.
One could also say that we observe a time where graphics were limited, space was limited, and excellent creativity was forcibly extracted from designers due to constraints beyond their control.
It's a lot easier to forget about the melody when you have the ability to add 16 different tracks on top of it.
One could also say that we observe a time where graphics were limited, space was limited, and excellent creativity was forcibly extracted from designers due to constraints beyond their control.
It's a lot easier to forget about the melody when you have the ability to add 16 different tracks on top of it.
author=Max McGee
I think what is a classic RPG is in the eyes of the beholder.
To me, THIS is a classic RPG, and those games you mentioned are a relatively modern and bizarre Japanese perversion of it.
One day, i should play DnD...
author=CrazeI played Treasure of Rudras. The epic boss battle musics gave me stiffies.
Everybody needs to play Radiant Historia, "the SNES game we never got."
Also, Rudras. EVERYBODY PLAY TREASURE OF THE RUDRASit's way better than FFVI
Also, in my opinion, good music, good characters and story is a nice addition but with boring gameplay, no siree Bob. It might as well be just a novel if it doesn't have proper gameplay.
DBAce9Aura
52
In regards to classic style RPGs, why limit it to just FF/DQ when you could just as easily emulate classic MS-DOS/PC RPGs like Ultima or Might and Magic and do to them what BoD7 and Cthullu did for the DQ formula.
author=LockeZauthor=LezalesOK, here's the problem. I don't understand how "fancy systems and developed battle systems" is in any way something that implies "non-classical RPG". It's one thing to make your game wildly different and weird, but the way you put it sounds like you expect games to have identical gameplay. Games have to be different from each-other in order to be new games. I will gladly play a game that uses a similar battle system to FF4, but if I'm playing something that uses all the same systems as FF4 it's not going to feel like a new game. It's going to feel like it's just FF4 with different enemies and different party members, and the reason it's going to feel that way is because that's literally all it is. It's literally the same game.
It seems that as it's really simple to do such games (pretty easy battle system, not that hard to reproduce graphics) people are moving away from that to stay original or fresh. I can understand that. People includes, either by scrips or eventing, some fancy systems, developed battle systems.
Even first-person shooters, the genre with the least innovation of any genre ever, all have some basic differences from each-other. You don't have to come up with wildly unusual RPG subgenres, but you do have to make a new game instead of just re-releasing someone else's game with a different plot and a few balance changes. This is why DBS games with nothing but the default systems are hated on.
Default RPG Maker is hated on? Uh oh, I'd better quit making my game right now.
While there are a few changes and additions to the default systems in my game, the default systems are literally perfect for the retro-style game I want to make. I love 'traditional' 80s-90s turn based RPGs, and since I'm not making any money off of my work, I'll make a game that I would enjoy playing. I could use a new battle script, but honestly there is no point at all in doing so other than being different for the sake of being different (at least in the case of this game).
Having said that, there are a number of considerations I've implemented to keep the old school feel while hopefully correcting a number of flaws my beloved games undeniably had; no random encounters, a quick walk speed, a save anywhere feature, instant party swapping anywhere on the map screen and no grinding (XP awards are given at certain points in the quest to ensure that the party is always at an acceptable level for the next challenge), to name the ones I've thought of so far. Ideally, I want people who take the time to play my game to enjoy themselves from start to finish; there is no point in having 'punishing' sections that try a player's patience, and even less excuse for poor design decisions (gulp).
I do plan to do a few things with the DBS, but I'm still finalizing what those things are going to be. I'm thinking about having character combat skills be found and purchased rather than following a strict class level-up progression, since that allows for a great deal more customization (and I don't care who you are; everybody loves customization).
Also, Treasure of the Rudras is awesome. Everyone should play it.
Can anyone give me one game that shows all these new fangled non-classic RPG maker type games?
I'm not trying to offend everyone. I seriously have never played one and I don't know what people are talking about when they say RPG Maker games are no longer Rpg Maker games.
As someone said before: of course there are differences and modifications of the same formula but the ones I've played have tweaks, not massive overhauls.
Even DnD when it hit the scene is considered modern. How many videogames in total have DnD rules for example and how many of those games are considered fresh and original even today?
I'm not trying to offend everyone. I seriously have never played one and I don't know what people are talking about when they say RPG Maker games are no longer Rpg Maker games.
As someone said before: of course there are differences and modifications of the same formula but the ones I've played have tweaks, not massive overhauls.
Even DnD when it hit the scene is considered modern. How many videogames in total have DnD rules for example and how many of those games are considered fresh and original even today?
iishenron
1105
I've asked on IRC before why, since the tools have gotten so much better, I don't see a bunch of Western RPGs being made with RPG Maker.
