Update Frequency: When is it too much or too little?

Thinking of game dev blogs in general, I must say that weekly is a good frequency. Higher frequency usually makes me go "Dude, I don't want to read and know this much!" and also drops the quality of the content, significantly lower frequency usually makes me stop checking the blog at all.

I don't really think it's too important for RMN games. They don't build up enough hype in the first place. And also you can only really give interesting weekly updates if you are actively working on the project full time.

Crucial Decision:delete the past for a better future?

Definitely keep it (as backup at least). In 10 years you will want to go back and look at it and then you'll be sad that you have deleted it.

I kinda go the LockeZ way of just wrapping up the project and then start a new one using all the knowledge I gained in the previous.

Not Sure if anyone's noticed...

Did Deltree ever say he deleted the pages because of this review? I just don't see it. He even replied to the review and it didn't sound like he is very angry at all.

What do you like or dislike about RM Horror games?

Imo, JRPGs suffer the problem that they always have the same story (at least it feels like it if you've been playing them for 20+ years) and often also suffer from TOO MUCH TEXT. The horror genre on the other hand often offers really unique and interesting stories told with little words. The combination of RPG gameplay and horror story is what I really love.

Action Meter: A good or bad thing?

Well, usually I'd say yes to active meters, but you seem to be going for a Wonder Boy style game (I really liked that series) and I think such a game would strongly suffer from the concept of a meter.

Wonder Boy solves the issue of multi-hitting by making the enemies getting pushed out of range when hit.

If your game just looks like Wonder Boy but doesn't play like it at all, I guess it could work. A good example of uncommon usage of ATB which worked out real well would be Parasite Eve 1. You wouldn't expect an ATB system in a horror game but in PE it really worked out well, but it made you concentrate on dodging attacks most of the time.

When do you have too many side quests?

I really dislike sidequests in general, but if there have to be some then I'd prefer:
1) They aren't "marked" as sidequests, they just happen.
2) You can never "collect" them. If you have one, you follow that story to the end before starting a new one.
3) They are all unique and don't feel like sidequests.

If there are only boring sidequests, then there should never be a limit to how many you can have. Because it just makes backtracking even more tedious. I mean it's time to reinvent these. Why not make a "fetch all sidequests in town" button where you just automatically get those 20 sidequests without having to talk to every NPC. A lot of otherwise wasted time saved like that.
But really, don't do those.

How do you design your dungeons?

I usually have a basic outline of the dungeon in my head. Then I try to fit a complex maze-like structure into that design. Often I find that there are too many possibilities left so I try to limit myself by adding very specific rules to the dungeon.

[Poll] Let's Talk About Phantasy Star

I'm a huge fan of the original Phantasy Star series, in fact I'm still playing it pretty much every year (in fact, I already played PS2 this year!).

Phantasy Star 1 - Really liked the combination of JRPG and grid-based dungeon crawler.

Phantasy Star 2 - Offers pretty much the most epic dungeon design ever. It's the core reason I'm caring so much about dungeon design these days and am bored by most games as they only feature mostly linear/deep dungeons.
Downside of the game was that some battles simply took too long.

Phantasy Star 3 - Really loved the idea about the generations and the world design is great, though dungeons often were far less interesting than in PS2.

Phantasy Star 4 - Is a lot more generic than the other games, but has a super high quality, a great story and even the dungeon design is slightly better again. It's easier to access for less experienced players too.

Phantasy Star Online - I kinda liked the idea of combining MMORPG with randomly generated dungeons. I mean that always fits together perfectly. The game has also some of the best boss battles I've seen in MMORPGs (actually requires you to apply playing skill rather than just mashing your hotkeys).
The problem of the game was that the random dungeon generation wasn't all that random in the end, there weren't enough different maptiles to keep it interesting, so it felt repetitive pretty fast.

Phantasy Star Universe - Felt too much like an MMORPG just without the MMO aspect. Offline mode had really boring dungeon design too. I wanted to like it and I even finished it, but in the end it was just an average experience.

How do you design your battle system?

Designing a battle system for me really isn't more than having a core idea of how it should work.
Then I just design and balance everything around that.

The core rules should be simple and the fun comes with the details.

A good example is Chrono Trigger. The design is basically just "Let's use the ATB system but add a combo feature to it" and that's all there is to it. The strategical interesting aspects come with the good monster design like a monster that switches between physical and magical immunity. Details like this I usually create during development rather than in the original design.

Tutorials: Yay Or Nay?

I prefer games that don't have any tutorials, not even optional. Learning by doing is a lot more fun and you will remember it much better after a break too. If your game is so complex that a tutorial is absolutely required, then you should rethink if your game isn't simply too complex for its own good.