ZEELLO'S PROFILE

edit: disregard this post

When I first got RPG Maker I thought there would be *no way* I would ask people to download a second file just to play my game.

Over time however I decided that downloading the RTP separately really isn't that big of a deal. I think the advantages outweigh the cons:

- Including RTP makes my game seem bigger in filesize than it really is. (The game I made with the Lite version was over 100 MB, whereas with the full version it's only a few MB. Only a few MB!! I loved that)
- File hosting. It's more convenient to host as small a file as possible, since it allows me to upload quickly not to mention some sites have filesize caps. The RTP is readily available on other sites, so there's no need to host it myself.
- Including RTP assumes the game is 100% finished, will never be revised, and not being playtested. (it also assumes the downloader will never play another RPG Maker game, and that you will never go on to make another game)
- I've already shown demos of my work so far to someone, so that person has the RTP already at this point. And a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.

My current workaround to this issue is having that character be the only one who can use items.

However, I had a game idea where you have 4 party members and each one has their own items. Preferably, each character's respective item menu should not display anyone else's items. So in a way the items are like skills/spells (i.e. specific to that user) except they have a limited number of uses. Like, rather than give a person a fire spell and a healing spell and X magic points, they just get a certain number of both spells.

I would always change the thing that held back the game the most. Telling me I can't make "major revisions" is rather vague. However I use such a criteria all the time when analyzing games and how I would have done better, but I define major revisions as anything as that would require much more development time/money/resources or something that is beyond the graphical capabilities of the system it was released on. Of course I'm not a programmer so it's rather callous of me to make such judgments at all, but I figure most of the time it's pretty obvious, and besides, gamers criticize devs all the time anyway.

Here's an example. When remaking any major FF I would remove the random encounters no matter what. I would not consider this a major revision in a technical sense, compared to lets say, converting FF7-9 to have 3d environments instead of 2D backdrops, which would be a major revision. Notice my personal view if an "efficient" revision as opposed to the latter "inefficient" revision. (functionally keeping the game similar despite pouring tons more work creating new environments) But this thread almost seems to suggest that removing random encounters would be a major revision simply because it is an aspect of the game I dislike. That's how this thread major revision. O.o Maybe a better definition would be removing anything that defines the game or sets it apart from other dogs. Trying to make every RPG you mean to fix more like your personal favorite RPG is arguably kind of a copout.

Anyway another interesting thing about this thread is that you didn't name names. No specific games are stated instead you refer to broad, groups like "grind heavy rpgs" but that's too vague for my tastes. I prefer to point out the more specific things wrong in games, and specific things to make them better. Saying "this is boring" and then suggest fixing it by saying "add more interesting elements" (oh of course, how did we not think of that) is kind of weaksauce imo.

So long as you let the player equip something immediately after getting it, that should be fine.

Bad is if:
- Getting equipment right after beating a major boss and not being able to equip it until 20 minutes of cutscenes later.
- Getting mutilple equips at a time. (So player has to remember to equip each one) Better to spread out the equips.