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
Button Mash - Forcing the player to use different skills
Wow, I was totally tempted to make another post about WoW and Paper Mario and then I realized I already did that in this topic.
Anyway, another thought that works is making taking damage more meaningful. In most Final Fantasy games, you get enough Potions to stay at full health constantly, and running out of resources is never an issue.
However, in Earthbound (especially the first few chapters) you have limited inventory, items don't heal you that much, your spells are limited to small amounts of PP (which can only be efficiently recovered at an inn, PP restoring items are rare), and the enemies can hit you very hard. You have to take down baddies quickly and often even avoid battles to survive a dungeon. The game doesn't really capitalize on this fully, but it's certainly not as forgiving as some RPGs.
This theory also applies to roguelikes, where you never know what's around the corner, and every resource is limited.
Anyway, another thought that works is making taking damage more meaningful. In most Final Fantasy games, you get enough Potions to stay at full health constantly, and running out of resources is never an issue.
However, in Earthbound (especially the first few chapters) you have limited inventory, items don't heal you that much, your spells are limited to small amounts of PP (which can only be efficiently recovered at an inn, PP restoring items are rare), and the enemies can hit you very hard. You have to take down baddies quickly and often even avoid battles to survive a dungeon. The game doesn't really capitalize on this fully, but it's certainly not as forgiving as some RPGs.
This theory also applies to roguelikes, where you never know what's around the corner, and every resource is limited.
Did you want to make an RPG/Game? Be honest!
author=LockeZ
So yeah. I think I can safely say that even before I knew about RPG Maker, I had it in my blood.
I was drawing my own Sonic 2 levels in when I was 4 years old. Suck it, nerds. (They were really bad levels)
We had Hyperstudio too, I remember playing around with it and thinking it was the coolest thing ever. Never actually used it though but playing with the buttons was fun.
Did you want to make an RPG/Game? Be honest!
author=kentona
That sounds like Settlers of Catan
Apparently in Germany (and other European countries) they take their boardgames super seriously. I loved board games when I was a kid, but looking back, playing The Game of Life or Chutes and Ladders is pretty dumb when you don't do anything but throw dice.
Comedy Games
author=Solitayre
There's a lot more to writing comedy in a game than gratuitous swearing and lame pop culture references. Comedic timing, wordplay, and subtlety are key. It helps to actually be a decent writer if you're going to try to make a comedy game.
This.
1) A comedy game is only gonna pull off "comedy" if it has well-written, well-timed humor.
2) A comedy game is still a game, so the game must still be fun to PLAY, not just mediocre gameplay surrounded by humor, well-written or not. Hint: integrate the humor into the game mechanics, or you might as well just make it a movie.
What makes games "fun"?
Games are fun when they engage the player, either through:
1) immersion in the world created by the game
2) challenges created by the game that require constructive thought and problem-solving
3) relaxation created by a simplified, cathartic rhythm-of-play or environment
I feel like typing about 10 posts' worth of analysis here, but I'm going to at least try and pay attention to my lecture so I'll leave it at that.
1) immersion in the world created by the game
2) challenges created by the game that require constructive thought and problem-solving
3) relaxation created by a simplified, cathartic rhythm-of-play or environment
I feel like typing about 10 posts' worth of analysis here, but I'm going to at least try and pay attention to my lecture so I'll leave it at that.
Difficulty
I agree with a lot of the opening post.
I'm beginning to grow more and more distasteful of today's systems that rely on Preparation for challenge, because the most difficult challenges require you to do try at least twice - and often, the first time is overly hard (challenge is unpredictable) and the second time is jokingly easy (challenge is known and properly planned for). That being said, if a game was built around this mechanic, it could be really cool - for example, maybe before a difficult boss fight you know is coming, you (optionally) gather lots of information on the boss, and thus you know to bring Holy Water or not to rely on Fire spells. If you skip this step, then you might be in trouble. IIRC, early editions of D&D used this mechanic in preparing for dungeon runs.
I also think there's overlap between Complexity and Problem-Solving, seeing that problem-solving is created by the amount of complexity within the game's mechanics. Chess is more complex than checkers because all of the pieces have different abilities, and using them all together properly along with analyzing your opponents' position requires problem-solving. You could incorporate the chess-like feel of constant analysis and creative problem-solving into an RPG in a boss fight with some simple scripting:
-Boss will use general attacks at first, but will preferably target the opponent's weak spots (party members that are low on HP)
-Boss will heal when he gets low on health (prompting you to silence him when he gets weaker)
-Boss will attempt to use combinations of effects of abilities, ex. "trapping" a healer by silencing him and then targeting a low-armor party member
(These are some basic examples. If both parties are presented with the same information it could create a high-strategy battle)
On another note, "twitch"-battle RPGs like Paper Mario never bothered me. It made the battles more interactive than a lot of other RPGs I've played, where mashing "A" through every battle works just fine if you're a high enough level.
I'd like to see an RPG where you are limited in your ability to overlevel, and your strategic ability decided your success or failure. Sometimes grinding levels can be cathartic, but often I just don't feel like it, and it's time I'd rather spend facing a challenge that requires constructive thought.
I'm beginning to grow more and more distasteful of today's systems that rely on Preparation for challenge, because the most difficult challenges require you to do try at least twice - and often, the first time is overly hard (challenge is unpredictable) and the second time is jokingly easy (challenge is known and properly planned for). That being said, if a game was built around this mechanic, it could be really cool - for example, maybe before a difficult boss fight you know is coming, you (optionally) gather lots of information on the boss, and thus you know to bring Holy Water or not to rely on Fire spells. If you skip this step, then you might be in trouble. IIRC, early editions of D&D used this mechanic in preparing for dungeon runs.
I also think there's overlap between Complexity and Problem-Solving, seeing that problem-solving is created by the amount of complexity within the game's mechanics. Chess is more complex than checkers because all of the pieces have different abilities, and using them all together properly along with analyzing your opponents' position requires problem-solving. You could incorporate the chess-like feel of constant analysis and creative problem-solving into an RPG in a boss fight with some simple scripting:
-Boss will use general attacks at first, but will preferably target the opponent's weak spots (party members that are low on HP)
-Boss will heal when he gets low on health (prompting you to silence him when he gets weaker)
-Boss will attempt to use combinations of effects of abilities, ex. "trapping" a healer by silencing him and then targeting a low-armor party member
(These are some basic examples. If both parties are presented with the same information it could create a high-strategy battle)
On another note, "twitch"-battle RPGs like Paper Mario never bothered me. It made the battles more interactive than a lot of other RPGs I've played, where mashing "A" through every battle works just fine if you're a high enough level.
I'd like to see an RPG where you are limited in your ability to overlevel, and your strategic ability decided your success or failure. Sometimes grinding levels can be cathartic, but often I just don't feel like it, and it's time I'd rather spend facing a challenge that requires constructive thought.
Whatchu Workin' On? Tell us!
I just released my first game for iOS today :D
It's a little sad actually, since I don't have an iPhone or iPad myself, so I can't actually buy it and play it...
It's called Dzoop. It's a puzzle game, you slide knobs around and you try and figure out how to get them all into their goals at the same time. It's simple and quick to learn, but surprisingly addicting, especially if you like ze challenge.
If you want, you can try and figure out the puzzle above, it's an easy one. The rules are:
1) You can slide all the knobs in any cardinal direction. All the knobs move in unison: if you slide up, all the knobs go up as far as they possibly can.
2) Knobs block other knobs from moving, as do dead ends.
3) Each knob has to end up in its own goal at the same time.
I did a lot of the game design, UI and game art. My friend is a programmer (it's his apple account) and he did all of the code.
So this weekend I'm:
1) whoring myself out on the internet to get buyers for dzoop
2) doing level design for our team project in my Game Design class (essentially I'm creating several tiny pinball machines, it's fun)
3) sweating a lot, because Michigan decided to get hot again
It's a little sad actually, since I don't have an iPhone or iPad myself, so I can't actually buy it and play it...
It's called Dzoop. It's a puzzle game, you slide knobs around and you try and figure out how to get them all into their goals at the same time. It's simple and quick to learn, but surprisingly addicting, especially if you like ze challenge.
If you want, you can try and figure out the puzzle above, it's an easy one. The rules are:
1) You can slide all the knobs in any cardinal direction. All the knobs move in unison: if you slide up, all the knobs go up as far as they possibly can.
2) Knobs block other knobs from moving, as do dead ends.
3) Each knob has to end up in its own goal at the same time.
I did a lot of the game design, UI and game art. My friend is a programmer (it's his apple account) and he did all of the code.
So this weekend I'm:
1) whoring myself out on the internet to get buyers for dzoop
2) doing level design for our team project in my Game Design class (essentially I'm creating several tiny pinball machines, it's fun)
3) sweating a lot, because Michigan decided to get hot again
Working in teams: Yay or nay?
Holy hell, I forgot about this topic.
Visions and Voices was pretty good, ironically it was half Craze's doing and he is getting all bold-lettered about not working on a team, so hell if I know.
That being said, since I made this topic, I've taken game design courses at my college, where you split into four-man teams with all of the basic roles covered (programmer, artist, designer) and you have a few weeks to make a game. It works pretty darn well. With everyone focusing on their specialization, the game comes together much more quickly and people enjoy their work much more. We're using Unity as a game engine, which has a steeper (but not terribly steep) learning curve and trying to make a game by yourself in the same timeframe would be much more limiting.
One of the interesting things about RPG Maker is that it lowers the learning curve of art/programming so that a person can focus mainly on design - but there's still art and programming involved. Having to juggle all of those roles by yourself, especially if you dislike one of them greatly, can turn your game-making experience into a hassle instead of a pleasure.
I imagine that the largest percentage of game makers on this site are designers - who prefer making fun mechanics, great storylines, or interesting levels/areas, for example - and while designers may be able to handle the art/programming involved in a game (again, RPG Maker does lower the learning curve, thankfully), for some people getting bogged down by creating pixel art or trying to code/script is too much and they throw away projects altogether. These are the people who either need to lower their needs for specific art/code or find another way to solve that particular problem - a teammate may help.
P.S: I personally like working alone quite a lot; I am at least capable in art & code and it doesn't slow me down too much. But working in a team once in a while feels like a breath of fresh air - there's less pressure to do everything.
Visions and Voices was pretty good, ironically it was half Craze's doing and he is getting all bold-lettered about not working on a team, so hell if I know.
That being said, since I made this topic, I've taken game design courses at my college, where you split into four-man teams with all of the basic roles covered (programmer, artist, designer) and you have a few weeks to make a game. It works pretty darn well. With everyone focusing on their specialization, the game comes together much more quickly and people enjoy their work much more. We're using Unity as a game engine, which has a steeper (but not terribly steep) learning curve and trying to make a game by yourself in the same timeframe would be much more limiting.
One of the interesting things about RPG Maker is that it lowers the learning curve of art/programming so that a person can focus mainly on design - but there's still art and programming involved. Having to juggle all of those roles by yourself, especially if you dislike one of them greatly, can turn your game-making experience into a hassle instead of a pleasure.
I imagine that the largest percentage of game makers on this site are designers - who prefer making fun mechanics, great storylines, or interesting levels/areas, for example - and while designers may be able to handle the art/programming involved in a game (again, RPG Maker does lower the learning curve, thankfully), for some people getting bogged down by creating pixel art or trying to code/script is too much and they throw away projects altogether. These are the people who either need to lower their needs for specific art/code or find another way to solve that particular problem - a teammate may help.
P.S: I personally like working alone quite a lot; I am at least capable in art & code and it doesn't slow me down too much. But working in a team once in a while feels like a breath of fresh air - there's less pressure to do everything.
The Customer Is Always Right - Perception Of Designer & Player "Responsibilities" In Amateur & Commercial Video Games
Lemme crack an egg of knowledge and share what my design professor told me about peer feedback:
1) Don't be an idiot.
2) Don't listen to idiots.
#1 means don't be so stubborn and high-and-mighty that you ignore legitimate and/or wide-spread complaints about something in your game, because very often, you're just being an idiot.
#2 means don't listen to people who clearly don't know what they're talking about, or are offering you opinions that are not founded in reason, but in emotion or personal preference, because these people are idiots.
1) Don't be an idiot.
2) Don't listen to idiots.
#1 means don't be so stubborn and high-and-mighty that you ignore legitimate and/or wide-spread complaints about something in your game, because very often, you're just being an idiot.
#2 means don't listen to people who clearly don't know what they're talking about, or are offering you opinions that are not founded in reason, but in emotion or personal preference, because these people are idiots.
The Customer Is Always Right - Perception Of Designer & Player "Responsibilities" In Amateur & Commercial Video Games
I agree completely; I also believe some of the hate comes from the fact that the community between indies and their players (especially here on rpgmaker.net) is much closer to each other in terms of communication. When a player can talk to a developer, he can ask questions about the game dev process, the intention behind some parts of the game, etc. In addition, iteration time between game versions is much shorter, and players know devs are very capable of changing their game quickly. No one has the sort of connection with, say, Square Enix, but here it's all over the place, and it's evolved into players requesting and even demanding things of their game-making companions.
For an example, go to the World of Warcraft or HoN forums. They are full of players blaming the developers for making poor game balance choices, criticising poor management decisions, and requesting additions to the game. Both of these games have active communities and relatively short iteration processes (patches/updates), unlike a Final Fantasy game, which is released once and never patched or bugfixed.
In short: Players often complain because there is a chance (even if it's small) that their complaint might be heard and acted upon.
For an example, go to the World of Warcraft or HoN forums. They are full of players blaming the developers for making poor game balance choices, criticising poor management decisions, and requesting additions to the game. Both of these games have active communities and relatively short iteration processes (patches/updates), unlike a Final Fantasy game, which is released once and never patched or bugfixed.
In short: Players often complain because there is a chance (even if it's small) that their complaint might be heard and acted upon.
Games - Tester
Games - Other
