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
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
Profile
Locker
Play ListsKING OF GAMES'S PROFILE
Close
I'm a young fool and I make games via RM. I enjoy game mechanics and theories, especially new graphical experiments. I'm a master chip splicer and I draw my own resources as well. Teaching myself how to digitally paint via PS, after pixeling for several years.
Search
Filter
All
Game Pages
User Statuses
The end of RM2k/RM2k3?
I've never understood why there is such a clash among indie game dev engines, especially between RM versions. Craze is like a missionary trying to recruit people to VX, when you could break down so many more barriers if you just coded in C.
The end of RM2k/RM2k3?
It is foolish to dismiss rm2k3 as obsolete trash. There is utility yet in its obsolescence. If we have a mindset to always forget the past and be brutally progressive, we're missing half the picture. There is merit in history. Similarly, you could categorize pixel art as obsolete, but that doesn't mean that new games in 2D using it can't have stunning graphics.
Rm2k3 is one of the most accessible gateways into the idea of game design and story telling. Letting amateurs put ideas to the test and learn from them. Otherwise, it gives perspective when juxtaposed against newer engines. Those engines didn't come from nothing, there's a lineage there that is worth tracing the ideas through.
Posting wish lists is fruitless, because with a 'real engine' you could implement all of said features.
Rm2k3 is one of the most accessible gateways into the idea of game design and story telling. Letting amateurs put ideas to the test and learn from them. Otherwise, it gives perspective when juxtaposed against newer engines. Those engines didn't come from nothing, there's a lineage there that is worth tracing the ideas through.
Posting wish lists is fruitless, because with a 'real engine' you could implement all of said features.
You Let's Players are doing it wrong
You're right that a good commentator can be witty and insightful at the same time, weaving between wise-cracks and helpful advise seamlessly. But there is one major difference and that is what we're referring to under the umbrella term "LP."
These text based LP's are a completely different format, where you don't hear the person talking, or the game moving, you don't have to deal with the video format at all.
I'm specifically referring to the LP's of RM games that are prevalent in this community, most of which aren't really funny, or great overall. This is where the whole forcing it thing comes in, most of the LPs here try to be funny, and fail. But this is why I said they are mainly beneficial to the developers, or for people too lazy to download to see if it's worth checking out.
These text based LP's are a completely different format, where you don't hear the person talking, or the game moving, you don't have to deal with the video format at all.
I'm specifically referring to the LP's of RM games that are prevalent in this community, most of which aren't really funny, or great overall. This is where the whole forcing it thing comes in, most of the LPs here try to be funny, and fail. But this is why I said they are mainly beneficial to the developers, or for people too lazy to download to see if it's worth checking out.
Why rm2k3 is terrible for action games
You Let's Players are doing it wrong
author=CAVE_DOG_IS_BACKauthor=King of GamesWhy do you say that they should not be funny and then describe something that is inherently not funny.
LP's should not try to be funny, idk where the idea came from that spastic lunacy is somehow humourous, especially when applied to RM games.
Watch anything by nicob, and the point proves itself.
You Let's Players are doing it wrong
LP's should not try to be funny, idk where the idea came from that spastic lunacy is somehow humourous, especially when applied to RM games.
The LP should be the first time playing through the game. I would agree that if it's a LP of a commercial game then the LPer should know the game inside and out, give tips, and commentary about secret stuff like a video walkthrough. What LP's are in the RM community are not nor should they try to be a video walkthrough.
Instead they should act more as tools for the developer of the game. To gauge immediate and initial reactions and live criticism is the most important/valid part of LP's. To see how your players interacts with and plays your game is a vital resource that indie developers seldom get.
The LP should be the first time playing through the game. I would agree that if it's a LP of a commercial game then the LPer should know the game inside and out, give tips, and commentary about secret stuff like a video walkthrough. What LP's are in the RM community are not nor should they try to be a video walkthrough.
Instead they should act more as tools for the developer of the game. To gauge immediate and initial reactions and live criticism is the most important/valid part of LP's. To see how your players interacts with and plays your game is a vital resource that indie developers seldom get.
The Screenshot Topic Returns
Itaju, there are some major issues with your tiles from a pixel art perspective, most of which have to do with noise, saturation, and readability.
1.)Because the tiles are noisy/grainy (MnB/Refmap pulled this off successfully so maybe reference them) it hurts the readability. The high contrast also upsets the hierarchy of visual priority. If your floor tiles (grass, dirt, long grass) were less saturated and had less variation between color, it would start to look more like a solid plane that the sprites are interacting on, and we would be able to see the sprites more clearly.
I think if you took a more holistic approach to the rendering of your forms, you'd get a much more organic look. When you look at a tree you don't internalize every leaf that its branches consist of, rather you get impressions of clusters of leafs. Remember, this is pixel art, and relatively low res, so imitating how our eyes interpret shapes combined with the cluster loving form of pixel art, makes sense. Same thing applies to that water and probably the grass/bush auto-tile.
2.)In addition to the oversaturation of your colors, you're also using a lot of straight color ramps, so the colors give a flat/dull impression overall. If you employed some hue shifting, you might get more dynamic 3Dimensional look. (SD3 does this all the time, and I can tell you're copying SD3 tiles, which is fine, there's a lot to learn from them, and part of that is understanding how they applied colors effectively.)
The trees are an example of how this current style is detrimental. In the river scene I can't tell where the tree begins and ends, because it's flooded with a bunch of different colors, and the green blends into the grass behind it. This is what I mean by graphical priority. The 2nd layer of a chipset should be easily distinguished from the first layer, that is, using a different green ramp for trees so we can readily tell the layers/objects apart. Also when you use such vibrant yellows and reds, it forces our eyes to want to look at it, when we should be looking at the sprites.
I hope this is helpful and will clarify anything if you need me too, but it's one of the most important/fundamental lessons I've learned in my tribulations through pixel art.
1.)Because the tiles are noisy/grainy (MnB/Refmap pulled this off successfully so maybe reference them) it hurts the readability. The high contrast also upsets the hierarchy of visual priority. If your floor tiles (grass, dirt, long grass) were less saturated and had less variation between color, it would start to look more like a solid plane that the sprites are interacting on, and we would be able to see the sprites more clearly.
I think if you took a more holistic approach to the rendering of your forms, you'd get a much more organic look. When you look at a tree you don't internalize every leaf that its branches consist of, rather you get impressions of clusters of leafs. Remember, this is pixel art, and relatively low res, so imitating how our eyes interpret shapes combined with the cluster loving form of pixel art, makes sense. Same thing applies to that water and probably the grass/bush auto-tile.
2.)In addition to the oversaturation of your colors, you're also using a lot of straight color ramps, so the colors give a flat/dull impression overall. If you employed some hue shifting, you might get more dynamic 3Dimensional look. (SD3 does this all the time, and I can tell you're copying SD3 tiles, which is fine, there's a lot to learn from them, and part of that is understanding how they applied colors effectively.)
The trees are an example of how this current style is detrimental. In the river scene I can't tell where the tree begins and ends, because it's flooded with a bunch of different colors, and the green blends into the grass behind it. This is what I mean by graphical priority. The 2nd layer of a chipset should be easily distinguished from the first layer, that is, using a different green ramp for trees so we can readily tell the layers/objects apart. Also when you use such vibrant yellows and reds, it forces our eyes to want to look at it, when we should be looking at the sprites.
I hope this is helpful and will clarify anything if you need me too, but it's one of the most important/fundamental lessons I've learned in my tribulations through pixel art.
Games - Tester
Games - Other
