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 ListsRADNEN'S PROFILE
Radnen
1806
Close
I like to make video games, especially action RPG's.
I make games slowly. Call me slow. But quality is always better than quantity!
Moo.
I make games slowly. Call me slow. But quality is always better than quantity!
Moo.
Search
Filter
All
Game Pages
User Statuses
Lowering your standards and finishing your game
post=213487
Pretty sure your definition of "chopping off unnecessary parts without lowering the standards" is the same as what everyone else meant by "lowering the standards." Most of what you said is still pretty true though.
i thought lowering standards meant using crappy placeholder graphics in lieu of something you couldn't get done in time rather than completely chopping that away. I look at standards as a function of effort.
post=213487
I do disagree with this point:There's nothing worse than trying to figure out how. So, a game is not something to be testing new concepts on. A game should incorporate what you already know. If you have trouble with or want to experience a new idea, make a short but sweet tech demo. Don't feel obligated to release it, however.
In my opinion, if you don't have a new idea, you shouldn't make a new game. If the game does nothing unique, there's no reason for it to exist. My reason for making games as a hobby is because I like to design original creative works. If you just want to re-release what you've already done before, I hope you're getting paid for it.
Then you aren't getting my point. I do agree with you, a game should be new and original. I meant, if you've never made an ABS before, a new (main) game isn't the place to do it. A short tech demo where you practice that is the place. If you want to make an epic, don't test new game mechanics until you know how or got it down fairly well on a previous (even smaller) project. Otherwise you might stop working on the main project because you couldn't figure out how to incorporate the battle system - since it's the first time you did it. And that blows worse than story and graphics (which could have been the best ever).
Lowering your standards and finishing your game
I don't lower my standards, instead, I chop off unnecessary mechanics. My game had randomized item drops, but it was getting too long and tedious to introduce so I just stopped doing that, and went with a simpler design. I don't think this is lowering my standards, because I still think I've got a fairly high standard for items, but its now seen in a different more time-approachable way.
Also, because I'm programming this game, I will sometimes try to program a system that will help me later on rather than bite me in the ass: Game State Handler, for one.
It may come down to three things:
1. Amount of Content.
2. Ability.
3. Standards.
In that order. Lowering the standard for me is a last resort, if you can't find other ways. What happens with lowering the standard is you can get crap. Which means you can get little replay. And lets face it: Belting out another game will not help (unless it regards ability), because you are faced with the same formula for game creation. If all you do is lower standards on a game you'll be a production line of crappy games.
With respect to 1: Perhaps you shouldn't strive for the "epic". Perhaps create a simple game that gives a foundation for your characters, and work up to the epic. And if you don't choose to do so, you can leave it there and no one will think any different of you (unless they want more, and I hope this encouragement is a good sign to release something more, but not necessarily of "epic" proportion).
With respect to 2: Perhaps studying or creating tech demos can help here. There's nothing worse than trying to figure out how. So, a game is not something to be testing new concepts on. A game should incorporate what you already know. If you have trouble with or want to experience a new idea, make a short but sweet tech demo. Don't feel obligated to release it, however.
With respect to 3: This places gives too much criticism, while good, I can easily see why people may want to push the limit. They saw perhaps one or two great games, and feel the need to mimic that while not receiving flak because they decided to use a clashing chipset. Bottom Line: Be thankful it is done.
A game is not something you should feel rushed to finish. It's like a painting. What if Leonardog DaVinci just scribbled the other half of Mona Lisa's face? For the sake of getting it done? I'd rather see it half complete! (It could mean something... Ha! But for games, I guess it can break the experience).
It's really a paradox, dammit.
Also, because I'm programming this game, I will sometimes try to program a system that will help me later on rather than bite me in the ass: Game State Handler, for one.
It may come down to three things:
1. Amount of Content.
2. Ability.
3. Standards.
In that order. Lowering the standard for me is a last resort, if you can't find other ways. What happens with lowering the standard is you can get crap. Which means you can get little replay. And lets face it: Belting out another game will not help (unless it regards ability), because you are faced with the same formula for game creation. If all you do is lower standards on a game you'll be a production line of crappy games.
With respect to 1: Perhaps you shouldn't strive for the "epic". Perhaps create a simple game that gives a foundation for your characters, and work up to the epic. And if you don't choose to do so, you can leave it there and no one will think any different of you (unless they want more, and I hope this encouragement is a good sign to release something more, but not necessarily of "epic" proportion).
With respect to 2: Perhaps studying or creating tech demos can help here. There's nothing worse than trying to figure out how. So, a game is not something to be testing new concepts on. A game should incorporate what you already know. If you have trouble with or want to experience a new idea, make a short but sweet tech demo. Don't feel obligated to release it, however.
With respect to 3: This places gives too much criticism, while good, I can easily see why people may want to push the limit. They saw perhaps one or two great games, and feel the need to mimic that while not receiving flak because they decided to use a clashing chipset. Bottom Line: Be thankful it is done.
A game is not something you should feel rushed to finish. It's like a painting. What if Leonardog DaVinci just scribbled the other half of Mona Lisa's face? For the sake of getting it done? I'd rather see it half complete! (It could mean something... Ha! But for games, I guess it can break the experience).
It's really a paradox, dammit.
How long should a game take to make?
I agree with WolfCoder, my game updates can be released as a patch, and if done proper, there should be no reason to start over. I will be able to create seamless patches (unless I do something kinda weird and modify the level formulas, even then I can still code a "remodification" formula, to note the game is not highly stat oriented).
But I do agree with the fact that if I release a chapter, I might not want to work on it again (or for a long period of time). This is what ultimately gives me pause for concern.
I do know that with a coded video game, I'm always looking to optimizing my code (which is not necessarily making it better, but faster, or more reliable). Because "better" is really a function of usability. You can code a fast and efficient battle system, but it may still be crap, which is definitely not better. And I must balance the time spent here.
Right now, I've been dabbling with game state (good to know if you are in the industry), but when my project was first created I didn't have a game state handler (even if I had hard-coded game state). Therefore I'm on the fence if right now is the best time to introduce this: Good news is that I don't have too many menus made yet.
But I do agree with the fact that if I release a chapter, I might not want to work on it again (or for a long period of time). This is what ultimately gives me pause for concern.
I do know that with a coded video game, I'm always looking to optimizing my code (which is not necessarily making it better, but faster, or more reliable). Because "better" is really a function of usability. You can code a fast and efficient battle system, but it may still be crap, which is definitely not better. And I must balance the time spent here.
Right now, I've been dabbling with game state (good to know if you are in the industry), but when my project was first created I didn't have a game state handler (even if I had hard-coded game state). Therefore I'm on the fence if right now is the best time to introduce this: Good news is that I don't have too many menus made yet.
How long should a game take to make?
Defiant, I have read that article before! It's what got me back on the blockman project after like 2 months of inactivity.
Some problems I've had is actually with the editor I"m using. Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't RPGMaker make it easy to lay out events and tiles? These are areas I've been stumbling on, To make a simple sidequest takes a lot out of me.
Some problems I've had is actually with the editor I"m using. Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't RPGMaker make it easy to lay out events and tiles? These are areas I've been stumbling on, To make a simple sidequest takes a lot out of me.
How long should a game take to make?
Let's see... The first conception of this game was back in 2006/7, when I had a rough story and crappy game. I quit that to try a different battle system. In 2008 I made a second game, with a tactics battle system, but got the first demo out and quit it, This is what I mean by releasing a demo and then never working on it again.
This game started late '09, early '10. So it's been close to a year ~10 months. If something can take 3 years. Then I don't think it can be all too bad. So far some of my hurtles have been programatic, like an ABS. With that squared away, I'm really only doing maping, cutscenes, dialogs and eventing. Which is what the last 4 months have kinda been. I think this is the longest endeavor.
Do you guys put more time into planning or building? I think I'm doing more time in building than planning. (I think this is a good thing, no?)
This game started late '09, early '10. So it's been close to a year ~10 months. If something can take 3 years. Then I don't think it can be all too bad. So far some of my hurtles have been programatic, like an ABS. With that squared away, I'm really only doing maping, cutscenes, dialogs and eventing. Which is what the last 4 months have kinda been. I think this is the longest endeavor.
Do you guys put more time into planning or building? I think I'm doing more time in building than planning. (I think this is a good thing, no?)
Single Character RPGs: How Can They Work?
The character must be an exegesis of yourself. This is obtained through choices and immersive gameplay. Otherwise you create this kind of empty shell you play around with.
How long should a game take to make?
post=212787
You do keep notes, right? You have index cards scattered everywhere, notebook pages full of ideas, too many .txt and .rtf files to count? Right?
I have a script written out, and I have the story planned. I only know as much of the game as up to the end of the second chapter. (Mapping, enemies, items, etc).
As far as keeping a folder full of notes, I uh... Don't have quite as many. For example I have only worked on one side quest. What I'll likely do is that later on in development I'll add more side quests (once i know the main story is completable).
How long should a game take to make?
post=212728
Once you finish 3 chapters put out a demo with ONLY the first chapter.
Hey, good idea! But I think I'm going to have to release the first two chapters as a demo, since one must lead into the other. As in, it'd be a weird cut off point.
So, I guess I must do 4 chapters before then?
How long should a game take to make?
So, how far along before I release a demo? I was thinking of it having like 7 chapters. A demo per chapter? The culmination of a chapter happens sometime after the end of a boss battle. Because the game will be open ended... What I guess I can do is release a chapter per area of the game to explore, and that in its own right gives you something more to do.
How else should demos be released? It's hard for me to know when a good cut off point is. And, if I do release a demo, will I still be able to continue making the game or will it fall into the pit of being "demoed forever"?
How else should demos be released? It's hard for me to know when a good cut off point is. And, if I do release a demo, will I still be able to continue making the game or will it fall into the pit of being "demoed forever"?
How long should a game take to make?
My heart tells me: As long as it takes, but my brain tells me: Whenever is feasible.
These two thoughts just tear at my consciousness whenever I lay down a freaking tile. See, I've been working at my Blockman project here for months, but there would be long, very long periods of time where I don't do anything at all. Do you guys have similar experiences?
The problem is that mapping and story become very monotonous, even if the mapping and story (I believe) are very good. I figure that if I go faster I make a crappier project. I have a lot done, but then I realize the more I work on it I have far less than I thought.
It's quite daunting, really. It's not that I'm adding too much unnecessary things. I mean, it's things like shops, player status screens, and a working inventory. I must program these from scratch and make them error free and smooth to use.
I can get this project done, but I hate seeing it gather dust here for long bouts of time. It's as if I'm not working on it or that its somehow on hiatus... But its not! What's the best coping strategy? Am I loosing focus too often?
These two thoughts just tear at my consciousness whenever I lay down a freaking tile. See, I've been working at my Blockman project here for months, but there would be long, very long periods of time where I don't do anything at all. Do you guys have similar experiences?
The problem is that mapping and story become very monotonous, even if the mapping and story (I believe) are very good. I figure that if I go faster I make a crappier project. I have a lot done, but then I realize the more I work on it I have far less than I thought.
It's quite daunting, really. It's not that I'm adding too much unnecessary things. I mean, it's things like shops, player status screens, and a working inventory. I must program these from scratch and make them error free and smooth to use.
I can get this project done, but I hate seeing it gather dust here for long bouts of time. It's as if I'm not working on it or that its somehow on hiatus... But its not! What's the best coping strategy? Am I loosing focus too often?
Games - Tester
Games - Other
