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 ListsAMERK'S PROFILE
amerk
2539
CloseSearch
Filter
All
Game Pages
User Statuses
R.I.P. RPG Revolution
TUAH has been in demo mode forever. I haven't heard of much progress, but I haven't kept up with it, either.
R.I.P. RPG Revolution
author=Yellow Magic
RM IS DYIGN
Not dying, just changing and evolving and growing. When I first started the primary sites for me were:
- RPG Revolution (rpgrevolution.com) - gone with the wind
- RPG Maker VX (rpgmakervx.net) - still around, but barely
- RPG Maker Resource Kit (rmrk.net) - still around, but rather slow
- RPG Maker Network (rpgmaker.net) - still around and very strong
Now there's these primary sites for me:
- RPG Maker VX (rpgmakervx.net) - still around, but barely
- RPG Maker Resource Kit (rmrk.net) - still around, but rather slow
- RPG Maker Network (rpgmaker.net) - still around and very strong
- RPG Maker Web (rpgmakerweb.com) - very strong
- RPG Maker VX Ace (rpgmakervxace.net) - also referred to as VXAN - very strong
- Steam - still growing
So as you can see the number of sites have increased for me. Of course, I wasn't part of GW or RPG Palace or the like, so I can see why some may feel put off by this if they were part of those communities, but I also feel that over the past few years the stronger communities have evolved and have started focusing more on game design as a whole (regardless of the tool you are using).
Steam is quite unorganized at the moment and may never get the ability to grow as well as the rest, but it's clear the interest in RPG Making design is there.
Edit: Unless if by "dying" you mean dedication to the old programs (RM95, RM2K, and RM2K3). By that, then yes, I'm inclined to agree.
Off track, but there are a few sites that you can still gain support for and host games on made with old editors:
- RPG Maker Resource Kit (rmrk.net) - support is still there, but not quite as strong as it once was. Can also advertise your games there.
- RPG Maker Network (rpgmaker.net) - the best place I can think of to go to get support and to host games made with older RM editors, as well as other game makers.
- VXAN (rpgmakervxace.net) - While we don't offer support outside of VX and Ace, we do allow you to house all your games there, regardless of the game editor used (RM, non-RM, old RM like 95, 2K, and 2K3...).
So if you're looking for places beyond RMN to advertise your games and don't want to be limited to using IGM, XP, VX, and Ace - these are some sites you can use.
R.I.P. RPG Revolution
Even when she went to Ace.net, she tried, but after it went down again we knew it was over. So yes, I suppose we did give up in the end, but only because there was no other alternative by then and we already knew it was done for.
We still reminisce the good times, though. It's too bad that iEntry couldn't see passed their own arrogance, and I'm sure given time they'll do the same for VX.net.
It's not quite the same feel as the old, but lately I think RMN and Ace.net have upped their game in terms of activity. I have nothing against RM Web, as I frequent that a lot, but it's nice to see sites like this one still catering more to the hobbyist crowd.
I'm just sad because I posted a lot of images on the RRR gallery that I won't get back.
Edit:
Liberty, and the Wayback Machine isn't really helping me much, either. I can pull links to the early games and demos, but not completed games for some odd reason.
Edit 2:
It's the end of an era. 1st First Seed Material, now RRR.
We still reminisce the good times, though. It's too bad that iEntry couldn't see passed their own arrogance, and I'm sure given time they'll do the same for VX.net.
It's not quite the same feel as the old, but lately I think RMN and Ace.net have upped their game in terms of activity. I have nothing against RM Web, as I frequent that a lot, but it's nice to see sites like this one still catering more to the hobbyist crowd.
I'm just sad because I posted a lot of images on the RRR gallery that I won't get back.
Edit:
Liberty, and the Wayback Machine isn't really helping me much, either. I can pull links to the early games and demos, but not completed games for some odd reason.
Edit 2:
It's the end of an era. 1st First Seed Material, now RRR.
R.I.P. RPG Revolution
author=Ratty524
That's not new. In turn, however, the staff on the site also stopped giving a damn, because iEntry gave us less than two damns, and the whole damn site was decreasing in activity, and now it's shut down. Dammit.
While it may seem that way, the staff never did stop caring. Jonnie, kaz, and myself still feel like part of our team died, although to be honest, it's been dead long before iEntry finally pulled the plug. The problem was, we were limited in our tools to do anything about it when we knew it was dying.
Kaz and X-M-O both tried relentlessly on a number of occasions to gain the keys to the main site. They had ambitious ideas about cleaning up the main page: creating blogs, adding more game engines, shaping up the game list on the primary site to be more like RMN with user options... all sorts of great ideas to get people to stop by... and iEntry not only refused them access, but refused to even budge and do anything for the main site.
Maybe iEntry didn't feel there was any value to the site anymore once RMW came around and people started to jump ship. Also keep in mind that VX.net went through a sort of mutiny with iEntry around the same time and a lot of staff were cleaned out, so maybe iEntry was tired of trying to run both sites and ensure loyalty in their staff and members.
Regardless, though, iEntry didn't do a damn thing, but to say the staff didn't give a damn either is a bit unfair. Kaz tried until the bitter end. Even with the recent downtime (prior to the site turning off), kaz tried to reach out to iEntry to get them to fix it.
Only time will tell if the same fate befalls VX.net.
FOUR STARS...for what ??
Some games they wouldn't apply, and being forced to rate a 1 or 5 would either hurt or hinder the score from what it is.
Puzzle games for example would be more focused on game play and not story or atmosphere, so requring a score in those areas wouldn't make sense and could be left as not applicable.
I'm sure one they get things set up, there will be room for tweaks and adjustments as needed. I'm just happy for the compromise, and hopefully it will get a chance for lesser known games to get some attention.
Puzzle games for example would be more focused on game play and not story or atmosphere, so requring a score in those areas wouldn't make sense and could be left as not applicable.
I'm sure one they get things set up, there will be room for tweaks and adjustments as needed. I'm just happy for the compromise, and hopefully it will get a chance for lesser known games to get some attention.
FOUR STARS...for what ??
author=Liberty
Would code be able to only allow star ratings if the game is marked as completed and remove stars altogether if the game isn't marked as complete? That would probably help with reviews that have already been passed through the system.
I wondered the same thing. It could save effort having to do this manually. That way the review still stands, but doesn't effect the score, and they don't have to be manually archived later on.
Kentona, Liberty, again thanks for all your efforts in this. I personally think that more was accomplished these past couple days once egos (my own included) were set aside, and this method will hopefully end the dispute of reviews versus popularity once and for all.
author=Liberty
.1 increments would be a good idea, but would the graphic of stars be edited to reflect or rounded up/down instead?
Is it possible to make anything at .5 or above rounded up, and below .5 rounded down?
FOUR STARS...for what ??
An interesting idea I just had:
What if there was a sort of popularity ranking. Please, allow me to finish. The ranking would be kept invisible to avoid spam and trolls, and it would in no way effect the game's score.
So we don't change the review process and we keep the scoring based on reviews that have been approved (like we do now), however, the popularity of the game is determined based on traffic to the game's page.
Basically, anytime the main page gets a hit could be one popularity point, and any action on that page (subscribing, downloading, reviewing, commenting, etc) could be another point.
Then allow the viewers and players the ability to sort by popularity and reversed popularity. Again, the amount of popularity a game has won't be shown, and a popular game could still wind up with a low score, or an unpopular game with a high score.
What this does is:
1. It allows the player to see what's popular or not, and also helps to drive the popularity of a game they like by subscribing, commenting, downloading, or reviewing.
2. It gives new players a chance to see the score of the most popular and unpopular games and decide if it fits, and if they find it doesn't fit, it may encourage them to do a review of their own to balance out the score.
3. To avoid trolling and constantly refreshing a game page to boost popularity, maybe make it so a game can only get 1 popularity point per day per user just for visiting the page, but there is no limit to the amount of popularity points give per action. It's much easier to see when somebody is trolling with comments to boost popularity than just visiting a game. Also, if a review is denied, the game won't get that popularity point for the review until is approved.
4. Even an extra bonus is to allow popularity points to be subtracted if, for example, a comment is reported as spam.
What if there was a sort of popularity ranking. Please, allow me to finish. The ranking would be kept invisible to avoid spam and trolls, and it would in no way effect the game's score.
So we don't change the review process and we keep the scoring based on reviews that have been approved (like we do now), however, the popularity of the game is determined based on traffic to the game's page.
Basically, anytime the main page gets a hit could be one popularity point, and any action on that page (subscribing, downloading, reviewing, commenting, etc) could be another point.
Then allow the viewers and players the ability to sort by popularity and reversed popularity. Again, the amount of popularity a game has won't be shown, and a popular game could still wind up with a low score, or an unpopular game with a high score.
What this does is:
1. It allows the player to see what's popular or not, and also helps to drive the popularity of a game they like by subscribing, commenting, downloading, or reviewing.
2. It gives new players a chance to see the score of the most popular and unpopular games and decide if it fits, and if they find it doesn't fit, it may encourage them to do a review of their own to balance out the score.
3. To avoid trolling and constantly refreshing a game page to boost popularity, maybe make it so a game can only get 1 popularity point per day per user just for visiting the page, but there is no limit to the amount of popularity points give per action. It's much easier to see when somebody is trolling with comments to boost popularity than just visiting a game. Also, if a review is denied, the game won't get that popularity point for the review until is approved.
4. Even an extra bonus is to allow popularity points to be subtracted if, for example, a comment is reported as spam.
FOUR STARS...for what ??
author=RyaReisender
I'd probably do it so that:
1. Person needs to be logged in to vote.
2. Person needs to have pressed on a "download" button on the game page at least once or else he will get the message "You need to play the game before rating it".
I was going to counter argue that a person may have dl'ed the game on another site and may not want to dl it again. And then there is the fact that some games use off site hosts for their dl rather than through RMN. However, I'm taking a step back to say if RMN were to develop this, then
1. It should be reasonable to expect a person will download it again from here just to vote on it, even if they already have it. They can always delete the extra copy. But, by making the download a requirement from here, this could generate more traffic for RMN because this will encourage people to come here more often to download the game.
2. It should be reasonable to expect the developer will host their game here and not offsite, if they are expecting to receive a considerable amount of votes. By hosting the game here, it encourages more people to download from RMN versus going offsite, thus making point 1 more effective in generating traffic, and it will help RMN maintain their stats.
FOUR STARS...for what ??
author=Linkis
Even though I have not created a game as most of you have, I really love this site. This is where I spend time more than any other place on the internet.
I hope this thread that I created did not cause any damage or hard feelings to the rmn community.
Don't worry about it. I've only completed one game, and I've been too distracted to work on my next, mainly because I prefer playing games than making them.
And that's what's really nice about the RM community, is that it attracts both players and developers alike, and both can provide decent enough feedback.
I think this site, RMW, and VXAN are the top 3 RPG Maker sites now, and it's nice to see that the love for RPG Maker is still strong. Even if a large chunk of games are bad or never completed, there's still quite a few gems to be found (several of which are on this site alone).
On top of that, this site caters to almost any game editor ever known. Where else you going to go to find so many free games (legally)?
FOUR STARS...for what ??
author=alterego
Amerk misspoke when he was talking about the number of reviews. It's only natural that the number of reviews will increase with the number games and the number of users joining the site. But he was dead-on about the gap between the number of games and ratings, and the presence of biased ratings affecting games for years to come. But these numbers are likely to increase too, and we'll need to address that at some point or another. It's better if we start thinking about it now.
Yeah, pretty much. Liberty nina'ed my comment with her stats, so it's good to know the amount of reviews haven't died, but it does seem that games have suddenly skyrocketed in relation to the amount of reviews.
Kentona has a lot of good ideas that may offer a reasonable compromise, and even y/n helpful reviews and being able to separate from demos, episodes, and completed games could be a good start.
An interesting side note: I just played a game (Veil of Darkness) that was literally about 10 minutes long. And somebody did a full-fledged review for it highlighting the game (and what it was lacking). So it can be done for very short games, although I can't see myself spending more time on a review than the game itself, so I just went with a brief comment.
Games - Tester
Games - Other
