[Poll] Does RPG Maker net have low engagement rate?

Generally, most people around here don't really like "commercial" games. Some even look down on people who dare to ask for money for their "cheap" RPG Maker game. So yeah, I do think for commercial games RMN is probably the worst choice, particularly for final product feedback.

What RMN is still good at, even for commercial products, is getting feedback on game design ideas, though. But you don't ask those questions in your blog, but rather ask them on the Game Design subforum if you want feedback (the active game design discussions here are the main reason I even frequent this place, I only ever check out actual games if they make it to the featured games list).

The blog entries here are more for people who are already interested in a game and want to follow its development (which usually doesn't happen if the game is commercial). There aren't so many people that actively go through all new blog entries and check if they can give any feedback on them.

Where or how to learn game development management?

At work, we write documents. Requirement specifications that just list what should be offered. Design specifications that define exactly how it should be implemented, listing hundreds of numbered and testable requirements. These need to read and signed by all responsible people. Then the development starts. The sourcecode will be checked into a repository (SVN) daily. At the same time the test department can also start to write a test plan based on the requirements in the design specification. When development is finished, the testers work through the created test plan and verify that all requirements are met. If not, the resulting report is sent back to the developers, who fix the bugs and then the test is repeated until all is clear. The test plan gets signed again. Then the final phase is that the ones that originally decided what has to be offered in the requirement specification take a look at the product and "check off" all the listed requirements.
For continued support (fixing bugs, adding features), we use a bug tracking software where we collect all the bugs and feature requests. SVN also really helps to track changes.

In private, all my larger game projects are open source projects and we use Github for both source code managing as well as issue tracking.

For me it was never so much about "learning" it. Sure, you have probably 20 "steps" you need to take care of and remember at all times, but once you got those down, you are good. At work, we also have all the relevant work steps documented in separate document too.


How long it took me to know enough about a programming language to be able to write my first game? 2 weeks. Really just needed to know how integer variables work, and how to print text to the console. On my first lesson I learned to write "Hello World", the second week I learned integer variables, reading console input and "if" checks. After that I made my first text based adventure game. :p

Content: Remake Versus Re-Imagining

Why would you copy whole town designs in the first place?

I'm all for copying concepts that work and even agree that sometimes changing even just a little thing can ruin it (like Sprinites in I Am Setsuna), however, things like town and maps in general are always better when they are new.

I think for example of Phantasy Star 1+2+4. All those games play on the same planets and the towns even have the same names, but generally the world looks completely different in each of them. I think this is a good thing because exploring the exactly same areas in each game would be boring (like for example exploration in Xillia 2 is boring because it's the same regions as in Xillia 1).


The new Zelda combines all the things I hate in video games into one game:
- open world
- breakable weapons
- annoying menu handling
- "crafting"
- action combat that takes place directly on the map
- lack of levelup system

Can't judge the game itself, though, as I haven't played it and will not play it.

I agree with Locke. Can totally relate to the frustration about everything going open world.

To be fair, the Zelda style that is more like "aimless roaming" is still more acceptable for me that the open world type that's all "work through this list of 500 pointless side quests".

Drawback mechanics in single player games

A drawback system ruins any game. Players want to feel rewarded and not punished.

Any tips for an aspiring Jack/Jill of all trades?

Programming you just need some basic knowledge of it. Know the most fundamental things so you can get started at all. After that it's really mostly "know where to look" rather than "know everything".

Pixel Art really only requires you to read a few tutorials to understand the basic tricks there are to it (like removing the visibility of the grid), but that can be done in a single really, after that it's just a laaarge time investment. I'd claim everyone can do good pixel art, an inexperienced person simply needs more time. So what if you draw on that on 24x24 pixel maptile for 2 hours? As long as the result looks good and you have fun. I think many people here just completely underestimate the effort required and then just handwave it with "I'm not good at pixel art". Even some of my favorite pixel artists told me they invest an hour for a single maptile.

Can't say anything about composing as I really stayed away from it. I just listen to existing game music is simply to my favorite album while playing my games, so I don't really need ingame music. (The good thing about that is that I finally get some time to actually listen to the albums I bought! :p)

Is humor harder to pull off in games?

I don't think that's necessarily true, Rya, just that pure comedy games tend to be catered towards only one or two types of humour (usually the stupid-is-funny kind like South Park or Spongebob) and it doesn't work for everyone.

A lot of games, even serious ones, have humour sprinkled through them in parts and a lot of the time it works out fine because you've got a contrast between serious moments and lighter ones, so the lighter ones tend to shine a bit more and seem more unexpected (one aspect of comedy is how easily you can guess the 'punchline'. The more unexpected, even in stupid-is-funny comedy, the better the 'joke'). When every joke is fighting against a ton of other jokes, it tends to overdo it.

My impression is rather the opposite. Pure comedy games like South Park seem much better received than comedy in otherwise serious games.

I'm thinking of stuff like the Star Ocean games, that are always criticized for all the scenes I personally liked because they were funny (like the dialogues with Welch in Star Ocean The Last Hope) or how everybody hates on the characters in Tales of Graces even though their dialogues are pure comedy gold.

There's also the aspect of not really remembering many jokes even though they made you smile. They don't stick in your mind much during a more serious game, even if you were laughing at them at the time. Unless they're very very good and memorable, they get lost in the rest of the story/gameplay/etc.

That's also the opposite for me. I remember the jokes better if they were only in a part of the game rather than when the whole game's purpose was comedy.

I guess I can remember humour in games actually better than humour in comedy shows even (which usually end up with "I remember they were real funny but couldn't repeat any of the jokes").

Bleed 2

Bleed is totally a hidden gem. Only stumbled upon it because it was on sale and I was looking for games that only cost $1.

Bleed 2 is unfortunately Steam-only.

Is humor harder to pull off in games?

I would rather say that humor is not so well received in games. The games I actually found funny were mostly criticized for their boring story and silly dialogues. Put the same stuff in an anime and everybody loves it. But I guess it's also a slightly different target group.