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 ListsSLASH'S PROFILE
Close
I make video games that'll make you cry.
Search
Filter
All
Game Pages
User Statuses
Beginner's Intimidation and High Standards
To be honest, if I ever go back to RPG Maker, I'm either going to stick to the RTP or easily-found (and probably overused) custom sprites.
I - and many, many users on here - are designers. While many of us are also pixel artists or programmers, not all of us are, nor do we need to be. Since the stock art works and works well, I can't blame people for using it instead of trying - and often failing - to be pixel artists as well. Unfortunately, it has the annoying stigma that people who use the RPT must be bad designers, which just isn't the case. Maybe they're lazy, maybe they're new, but it's likely that they're just focused on the thing that matters to them - DESIGN.
There are ways to detect a poor designer aside from what spritesheet he's using, and people should realize that. On the flip-side, if you are a designer and you decide to stick with the RTP, realize that many people are going to pass over your game on that alone. Just because the prejudice exists doesn't mean you personally have to fight it, since you probably don't want to.
I - and many, many users on here - are designers. While many of us are also pixel artists or programmers, not all of us are, nor do we need to be. Since the stock art works and works well, I can't blame people for using it instead of trying - and often failing - to be pixel artists as well. Unfortunately, it has the annoying stigma that people who use the RPT must be bad designers, which just isn't the case. Maybe they're lazy, maybe they're new, but it's likely that they're just focused on the thing that matters to them - DESIGN.
There are ways to detect a poor designer aside from what spritesheet he's using, and people should realize that. On the flip-side, if you are a designer and you decide to stick with the RTP, realize that many people are going to pass over your game on that alone. Just because the prejudice exists doesn't mean you personally have to fight it, since you probably don't want to.
Realistic Difficulty Curve?
The difficulty curve I described earlier applies to any kind of game, but another aspect must be considered for RPGs: avatar strength. As an avatar levels up, his power rises, and the difficulty curve (with all its spikes and valleys) must be considered in relation to the avatar strength curve. Unfortunately, when you as a designer don't know how strong your player's avatar will be at any time, balancing this curve to maintain the game's challenge becomes difficult or impossible.
This is an inherit flaw in the "standard" RPG, in that player knowledge and creativity (the skills they are gaining as they play your game) can be (or in some cases, must be) replaced by meaningless avatar strength based on play time.
I find it very very hard to play RPGs or AAA games with RPG elements today, because they've figured out how to stretch game length without having to design better gameplay, at it really comes off as cheap after a while. RPG elements are fine when the solid game design is there with it - such as the original Modern Warfare, where online gameplay was a blast and the Rank-Up rewards were cool but not 100% necessary. But when a developer adds them in with no forethought, usually just to lengthen gameplay, the game becomes a grind. When a game with no solid, challenging gameplay becomes a grind, the fun factor suffers immediately.
TLDR: rpg elements are okay but making the player grind instead of creating skill-based content is cheap and poor game design
edit: too much caps? welp
This is an inherit flaw in the "standard" RPG, in that player knowledge and creativity (the skills they are gaining as they play your game) can be (or in some cases, must be) replaced by meaningless avatar strength based on play time.
I find it very very hard to play RPGs or AAA games with RPG elements today, because they've figured out how to stretch game length without having to design better gameplay, at it really comes off as cheap after a while. RPG elements are fine when the solid game design is there with it - such as the original Modern Warfare, where online gameplay was a blast and the Rank-Up rewards were cool but not 100% necessary. But when a developer adds them in with no forethought, usually just to lengthen gameplay, the game becomes a grind. When a game with no solid, challenging gameplay becomes a grind, the fun factor suffers immediately.
TLDR: rpg elements are okay but making the player grind instead of creating skill-based content is cheap and poor game design
edit: too much caps? welp
Beginner's Intimidation and High Standards
This is one of the reasons I think new devs should practice making a smaller, well-designed game before they attempt their masterpiece. It can be treated as a learning experience, both for the developer's skills and the "business" side of game-making (reviews, releasing, etc.)
A lot of people dive right into their masterpiece without the skills or experience to make it work, and in the end everyone is unhappy.
A lot of people dive right into their masterpiece without the skills or experience to make it work, and in the end everyone is unhappy.
Realistic Difficulty Curve?
I agree with the "easing in" of the player, but throughout the rest of the game there should definitely be hills and valleys of difficulty. They don't need to be crazy (though they can be) and if you can hint at them in-game, it's even better. Having a completely predictable, steady curve is noticeable by the player and can get old fast.
How do you motivate yourself?
It's funny, I was working on updating my website last night and I just hit a huge motivation block. I could barely pay enough attention to read one sentence, so I just hit the sack early (10pm, can you believe it?) and woke up today at 6am and started cranking away.
A full night's rest will do amazing things for your productivity. I know it seems that the more hours you put in, the more you'll get out, but if you're lacking sleep then those hours aren't gonna be as effective as if you put in a few well-rested hours, where you're full of energy and vigor.
tldr: SLEEP
(this applies to people like me who like to stay up til the wee hours of the morn)
A full night's rest will do amazing things for your productivity. I know it seems that the more hours you put in, the more you'll get out, but if you're lacking sleep then those hours aren't gonna be as effective as if you put in a few well-rested hours, where you're full of energy and vigor.
tldr: SLEEP
(this applies to people like me who like to stay up til the wee hours of the morn)
World Ease of Use: Interactivity and You
author=Link_2112
Eh, that video does bring up some good points but I don't like his style of talking. It's too ADHD.
Yea, egoraptor's main fare is goofy newgrounds flash videos. To its credit I've shown that video to a couple friends to give game design examples and it manages to be funny while getting the point across.
World Ease of Use: Interactivity and You
author=LockeZ
I like how you say that something would never be done and therefore shouldn't really be taken seriously as a possible option, and then in the same breath tell us about an extremely popular and well known game that does exactly that thing.
The only plot-necessary invisible item I can remember in DQ3 was the one on the northern shoal, and you had to use a spell to talk to a horse to find out about it. There were hints to it that made sense, not hand-holding giant sparkles that scream CLICK HERE.
I'm just observing how games in the past did it, whether it agrees with my views on it or not. It's not like successful games don't make bad design decisions.
World Ease of Use: Interactivity and You
author=Cozzer
I'd say it ruins the immersion more the fact that I have to search every tile of a room for something my character would istantly see.
Why would a player ever have to search every tile of a room unless the designer actually put items in invisible places for no reason? You can imply an item is there without having to put a generic sparkle. I mean, there's a damn contact lens in the desert of Earthbound and they didn't put a huge sparkle there.
I remember DQ3 having no visual clues for plot-necessary items, but at least characters hinted to their existence. Except for the Tiny Medals, which were meant to be hidden and were for collecting freaks and people with a player's guide.
World Ease of Use: Interactivity and You
Good video ^ although I'd say just watch the whole thing because the first few minutes give some funny examples of games that do the exact opposite of well-designed teaching through gameplay - crazy amounts of directions, tutorials, etc.
World Ease of Use: Interactivity and You
Less is always better. If there's any way to eliminate clutter, do it. Your game should *theoretically* teach the player everything he needs to know without actually telling him anything.
but slash this is an RPG there's no way to not have text
NO SHIT but you should limit it whenever possible. Instead of putting a big 'ol obnoxious ! over your head when standing next to a chest, you should imply that, hey it's a chest you should open it.
If you have a character walk up to a dresser in the first 5 minutes of the game and get you something, the player will immediately think OH MAN I CAN OPEN DRESSERS. If you have a 2-frame dresser open/close state and a sound effect, even the most obtuse player will get it, and bam, you've heavily implied that they should search ALL dressers from now on. Earthbound gave you present boxes, but everyone who's played it knows to search through the trash cans, pick up junk, whatever.
If something's really, unbelievably important, give it a sparkle. But don't make your players feel like idiots by telling them what to do. Use some subtlety.
EDIT: I find it extremely appropriate that someone posted the Sequilitis pic here, because that video's topic is pretty much exactly what we're talking about here - teaching the player in smart, subtle ways instead of an obtuse and overbearing way.
but slash this is an RPG there's no way to not have text
NO SHIT but you should limit it whenever possible. Instead of putting a big 'ol obnoxious ! over your head when standing next to a chest, you should imply that, hey it's a chest you should open it.
If you have a character walk up to a dresser in the first 5 minutes of the game and get you something, the player will immediately think OH MAN I CAN OPEN DRESSERS. If you have a 2-frame dresser open/close state and a sound effect, even the most obtuse player will get it, and bam, you've heavily implied that they should search ALL dressers from now on. Earthbound gave you present boxes, but everyone who's played it knows to search through the trash cans, pick up junk, whatever.
If something's really, unbelievably important, give it a sparkle. But don't make your players feel like idiots by telling them what to do. Use some subtlety.
EDIT: I find it extremely appropriate that someone posted the Sequilitis pic here, because that video's topic is pretty much exactly what we're talking about here - teaching the player in smart, subtle ways instead of an obtuse and overbearing way.
Games - Tester
Games - Other
