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 ListsTHEHONORABLERYU'S PROFILE
CloseSearch
Filter
All
Game Pages
User Statuses
Demon Hunter
Just beat the game!
It's a very solid game, probably one of the better RPG Maker games I've played. I purchased a bunch of Steam games during the summer sale but actually found myself wanting to complete your game first.
The plot is somewhat straightforward or cliched (in the beginning mostly) but a good sense of humor and personality makes it likable. One can get a feel for your personality while playing the game and that's something missing from a lot of commercial games and a major reason why I like playing RPG Maker games.
The battle system's fairly good, especially all the Persona/SMT-like buffing/debuffing and damage over time tech that takes place in boss battles. The regular battles lack variety, however, and are often kind of a chore. It's almost always the same format or routine against one to three enemies with really similar HP and threat levels.
Also, most of the 60+ demons are redundant. The demons within each of the FFXIII-style classes (Ravager, Protector, Saboteur, Synergist, Medic) have very similar stats and skills, and the demons you capture in the newest areas outclass your old demons. Some areas have three Saboteurs or Syngergists with like 6-7 of the same skills and only 2-3 different skills that make very little difference. Also, there didn't seem to be any Protectors in the last two areas. I think the battle system needed at least one more layer of depth (such as an elemental strength and weakness mechanic, or a very palpable difference between physical defense and magic defense like in Pokemon) where the demons could be meaningfully different in order to justify having that many demons.
But overall there were a lot of memorable experiences and things you did well. Mapping and music selections were solid. The Miranda, Urnis, Robert and Ferny reappearances were a lot of fun; the sense of progression has a very nice old-school feel.
I did capture all the area demons plus the extra secret demon quest after Rank 4, but where do you initiate the Weapon of the Gods quest?
The game was mostly bug-free but I can recall a few bugs. One freezes the game, but the others were very minor.
It's a very solid game, probably one of the better RPG Maker games I've played. I purchased a bunch of Steam games during the summer sale but actually found myself wanting to complete your game first.
The plot is somewhat straightforward or cliched (in the beginning mostly) but a good sense of humor and personality makes it likable. One can get a feel for your personality while playing the game and that's something missing from a lot of commercial games and a major reason why I like playing RPG Maker games.
The battle system's fairly good, especially all the Persona/SMT-like buffing/debuffing and damage over time tech that takes place in boss battles. The regular battles lack variety, however, and are often kind of a chore. It's almost always the same format or routine against one to three enemies with really similar HP and threat levels.
Also, most of the 60+ demons are redundant. The demons within each of the FFXIII-style classes (Ravager, Protector, Saboteur, Synergist, Medic) have very similar stats and skills, and the demons you capture in the newest areas outclass your old demons. Some areas have three Saboteurs or Syngergists with like 6-7 of the same skills and only 2-3 different skills that make very little difference. Also, there didn't seem to be any Protectors in the last two areas. I think the battle system needed at least one more layer of depth (such as an elemental strength and weakness mechanic, or a very palpable difference between physical defense and magic defense like in Pokemon) where the demons could be meaningfully different in order to justify having that many demons.
But overall there were a lot of memorable experiences and things you did well. Mapping and music selections were solid. The Miranda, Urnis, Robert and Ferny reappearances were a lot of fun; the sense of progression has a very nice old-school feel.
I did capture all the area demons plus the extra secret demon quest after Rank 4, but where do you initiate the Weapon of the Gods quest?
The game was mostly bug-free but I can recall a few bugs. One freezes the game, but the others were very minor.
- When you talk to the giant on Pendon route (before you're able to gain access to the Swamp) the nearby enemies can aggro in the middle of the event and get stuck on Alex when the event ends. The player won't be able to input any commands and the game's basically frozen. I had to redo part of the route when I first encountered this because I hadn't saved for a few minutes.
- Sometimes the call-out text over NPCs heads (such as "Quest") wouldn't update correctly and would stay over their heads even after accepting the quest. Unfortunately, I can't remember the exact circumstances or what might have caused this.
- This one may be more of a feature than a bug, but it did seem unintentional. If you get a capture milestone after a battle, the monster/battle event will stay on the screen without disappearing, allowing you to immediately fight another battle with the same event.
Aggression, or a.k.a 'Aggro'.
I'm on board with Feldschlacht. I think turn & menu based RPGs have a lot of potential for effective use of aggro, and I'm surprised that more people who are making menu-based RPGs aren't availing themselves of it. Here's how I'm handling it in my project.
Every unit is placed on one of five rows that affects their aggro/target rate:
+2 : 200% aggro
+1 : 150% aggro
0 : 100% aggro
-1 : 50% aggro
-2 : 25% aggro
The unit's current row plus any aggro-affecting states (such as Taunt/Provoke, enemy-inflicted Lock-On, or using certain powerful attacks that generate enemy attention/hatred) multiply to make up that unit's total aggro, which is visible to the player as a color-coded bar.
Aggro is designed to be dynamic and responsive rather than static for each unit.
First, every action has a rule that sets the units row upon use on that turn. For example, a unit equipped with a standard Sword may perform a standard slash that sets its row to +1 (150% Aggro), or a long-range Sword Beam that sets its row to -1 (50% Aggro), or a Parry guard stance (reduces weapon-based but not magic based damage) that sets the unit to the current row (whatever it happens to be at the time). So each unit's Aggro can change quite a bit from turn to turn as their current row changes (even before states like Taunt or Lock-On are added into the mix).
Second, many of the more potent player and enemy skills require some sort of set up before they can be used (MP works less like a tank that starts at max and gradually depletes and more like a fighting game super-meter that units have to use turns to charge up in battle; many moves require the unit to use a turn to enter into a stance or state before they can be used; some skills don't deal damage until a turn or two after they're used, etc).
Together these two mechanics allow the player to anticipate what's coming and to make smart decisions.
To use a basic example for simplicity's sake, the player may be fighting an enemy troop composed of three physical fighters that use basic attacks every turn and a higher-leveled elemental mage that uses several turns to charge its MP until it can unleash a devastating magic spell. It such a scenario, it may be best for the player to start with physical tanks in front rows unless/until the elemental mage is able to charge up enough MP for its spell. At this point, the player could shift some of the physical tanks to attack from the back rows and shift units that can tank magic attacks to the front rows to brace for the attack. Or any physical tanks that have guard stances that reduce magic damage (depends upon the equipped weapon or shield) could use those while staying in their current row. Or if the player has unit(s) with a skill that reduces magic damage on one ally unit for one turn, the skill could be applied to the physical tank(s) that are most susceptible to the oncoming magic spell. Or, if possible, the player might spend whatever extra needed resources are required to wipe out the high-level mage before it can use its spell. Etc. Etc.
For an aggro system to be interesting and worthwhile I think it's best if the player making smart choices actually matters, i.e., makes some difference between winning and losing.
In order to do this I've all but abolished healing. Rather, the player's party recovers a certain amount of HP (and MP) only after winning the battle (which after-battle rewards are indicated to the player before the battle, along with the enemy troop leader's name and level, by a hover message over the enemy visible on screen). And in dungeons the party's HP is fully recovered at each one-use save point. Hence, gameplay is less like being nigh-invincible as long as you stocked up on healing items (ala many JRPGs), or winning one battle at a time (ala Final Fantasy XIII), and more about successfully making it to from one checkpoint to the next (almost like Mega Man) until the dungeon is completed. Players can't simply erase poor choices on-command with a superabundance of low-cost healing. Strategically redirecting enemy attacks through the Aggro mechanic goes a long way in keeping up your limited reserves of HP until making it to the next save point.
Every unit is placed on one of five rows that affects their aggro/target rate:
+2 : 200% aggro
+1 : 150% aggro
0 : 100% aggro
-1 : 50% aggro
-2 : 25% aggro
The unit's current row plus any aggro-affecting states (such as Taunt/Provoke, enemy-inflicted Lock-On, or using certain powerful attacks that generate enemy attention/hatred) multiply to make up that unit's total aggro, which is visible to the player as a color-coded bar.
Aggro is designed to be dynamic and responsive rather than static for each unit.
First, every action has a rule that sets the units row upon use on that turn. For example, a unit equipped with a standard Sword may perform a standard slash that sets its row to +1 (150% Aggro), or a long-range Sword Beam that sets its row to -1 (50% Aggro), or a Parry guard stance (reduces weapon-based but not magic based damage) that sets the unit to the current row (whatever it happens to be at the time). So each unit's Aggro can change quite a bit from turn to turn as their current row changes (even before states like Taunt or Lock-On are added into the mix).
Second, many of the more potent player and enemy skills require some sort of set up before they can be used (MP works less like a tank that starts at max and gradually depletes and more like a fighting game super-meter that units have to use turns to charge up in battle; many moves require the unit to use a turn to enter into a stance or state before they can be used; some skills don't deal damage until a turn or two after they're used, etc).
Together these two mechanics allow the player to anticipate what's coming and to make smart decisions.
To use a basic example for simplicity's sake, the player may be fighting an enemy troop composed of three physical fighters that use basic attacks every turn and a higher-leveled elemental mage that uses several turns to charge its MP until it can unleash a devastating magic spell. It such a scenario, it may be best for the player to start with physical tanks in front rows unless/until the elemental mage is able to charge up enough MP for its spell. At this point, the player could shift some of the physical tanks to attack from the back rows and shift units that can tank magic attacks to the front rows to brace for the attack. Or any physical tanks that have guard stances that reduce magic damage (depends upon the equipped weapon or shield) could use those while staying in their current row. Or if the player has unit(s) with a skill that reduces magic damage on one ally unit for one turn, the skill could be applied to the physical tank(s) that are most susceptible to the oncoming magic spell. Or, if possible, the player might spend whatever extra needed resources are required to wipe out the high-level mage before it can use its spell. Etc. Etc.
For an aggro system to be interesting and worthwhile I think it's best if the player making smart choices actually matters, i.e., makes some difference between winning and losing.
In order to do this I've all but abolished healing. Rather, the player's party recovers a certain amount of HP (and MP) only after winning the battle (which after-battle rewards are indicated to the player before the battle, along with the enemy troop leader's name and level, by a hover message over the enemy visible on screen). And in dungeons the party's HP is fully recovered at each one-use save point. Hence, gameplay is less like being nigh-invincible as long as you stocked up on healing items (ala many JRPGs), or winning one battle at a time (ala Final Fantasy XIII), and more about successfully making it to from one checkpoint to the next (almost like Mega Man) until the dungeon is completed. Players can't simply erase poor choices on-command with a superabundance of low-cost healing. Strategically redirecting enemy attacks through the Aggro mechanic goes a long way in keeping up your limited reserves of HP until making it to the next save point.
Pages:
1
Games - Tester
Games - Other
