Charas-Project

Off-Topic => All of all! => Topic started by: Master Yoda on November 26, 2005, 07:42:28 PM

Title: What makes an RPGMaker game great?
Post by: Master Yoda on November 26, 2005, 07:42:28 PM

Well, as the title suggests, what truely makes a great game, turned out from one of us RPGMaker users, more importantly, us Charas PUB members?

Title:
Post by: Leon_1990 on November 26, 2005, 07:50:20 PM

Sluts...lotsa sluts....

@master yoda: dude! I'm 20 days older than you :D
now I've got a charas little bro lol

Title:
Post by: MrMister on November 26, 2005, 07:50:44 PM

Original concepts for systems/sidequests. Like, actually original.
The story doesn't make or break the game, but if you do succeed to make interesting characters, then it can make the game more enjoyable. Don't explain the whole backstory at once, release a bit of information once in a while; it makes the characters more fun, and adds some unexpected spice to their stories.

Title:
Post by: Master Yoda on November 26, 2005, 07:51:55 PM

mmmmm me like sluts

@Leon_1990, BIG BROTHER, love u man! we even from the same country! oooh yeah we rock! :D  :jumpin:

Title:
Post by: Master Yoda on November 26, 2005, 07:53:54 PM

Quote

Originally posted by MrMister
Original concepts for systems/sidequests. Like, actually original.
The story doesn't make or break the game, but if you do succeed to make interesting characters, then it can make the game more enjoyable. Don't explain the whole backstory at once, release a bit of information once in a while; it makes the characters more fun, and adds some unexpected spice to their stories.

i'd also have to agree. but this is the basis of all good rpgs and indeed, most good games in general

Title:
Post by: Leon_1990 on November 26, 2005, 08:08:16 PM

I also like if a game varies its themes a little.
games that ahs a gloom and doom feeling all the way through just plain suck.

Title:
Post by: Dragonium on November 26, 2005, 08:17:51 PM

You need emotion, and characters you can get into (Metaphorically). There are too many games about without any emotion in them whatsoever, and the characters have no real personality.

You also need good plot twists. If there are no plot twists, the game is a very, very boring road, and nobody wants to play one of those.

Title:
Post by: WarxePB on November 26, 2005, 08:19:00 PM

Everyone has different tastes in games. Some people like game with blood, gore, guns and sex, while others love engaging storylines and believable characters, while others still might prefer puzzle-heavy games. Your best bet is to cater to one specific audience, then work at it and make it as good as you can.

Title:
Post by: DragonBlaze on November 26, 2005, 08:33:45 PM

I say you need a good story, but you also have to build that story into the game. Some people think because their story is good, their game is automatically going to be good, but this is not the case. You have to present your story well, use good dialoge that will bring out the character's personality, use graphics that will proporly represent your ideas, use music that will trigger the right emotions you plan to have at the scenes.

You also need interesting gameplay. A story can be good, but the gameplay can be so boring that I just quit playing a game. Gameplay needs to be balenced and not over dificult at the begining. Battle systems should have unique features in them, and not every battle should be "keep pushing the space bar to win". A game should have a few fun minigames, and a variety of sidequests. The in game quests should also very and not always consist of one theme such as 'go down in the dungeon and retrieve the object'.

Title:
Post by: Master Yoda on November 26, 2005, 08:39:11 PM

cool, lots of valid points. so ok, lets have some examples of some great games, Charas member's games or otherwise.

Title:
Post by: Meiscool-2 on November 26, 2005, 08:39:59 PM

Quote

Originally posted by Leon_1990
Sluts...lotsa sluts....

@master yoda: dude! I'm 20 days older than you :D
now I've got a charas little bro lol

@Leon: OMG, I'm a day older then you! I've got a charas little bro now too! Happy day!

Anyways, inavative coding definently seperates games from each other. Over 90% of the games have the DBS in them, and I find that games with CBS or ABS are much more fun.

Title:
Post by: Bluhman on November 26, 2005, 08:41:47 PM

Quote

Originally posted by Meiscool

quote:

Originally posted by Leon_1990 Sluts...lotsa sluts.... @master yoda: dude! I'm 20 days older than you :D now I've got a charas little bro lol

@Leon: OMG, I'm a day older then you! I've got a charas little bro now too! Happy day!

Anyways, inavative coding definently seperates games from each other. Over 90% of the games have the DBS in them, and I find that games with CBS or ABS are much more fun.

Aww man, I'm so young.  :(

Title:
Post by: Master Yoda on November 26, 2005, 08:43:40 PM

awww, bluhman, you can be my little brother  :D


also, Mesicool, new screen of your game is awesome!

Title:
Post by: Ace of Spades on November 26, 2005, 08:59:47 PM

Quote

Originally posted by Meiscool
Anyways, inavative coding definently seperates games from each other. Over 90% of the games have the DBS in them, and I find that games with CBS or ABS are much more fun.

I strongly disagree with this. Sure cool systems make games fun, but if the games lacks good story (automatically sucks in my book), well developed characters and fun gameplay, then these faults outweigh the fancy systems by a long shot.

Title:
Post by: Master Yoda on November 26, 2005, 09:01:59 PM

Quote

Originally posted by Ace of Spades

quote:

Originally posted by Meiscool Anyways, inavative coding definently seperates games from each other. Over 90% of the games have the DBS in them, and I find that games with CBS or ABS are much more fun.

I strongly disagree with this. Sure cool systems make games fun, but if the games lacks good story (automatically sucks in my book), well developed characters and fun gameplay, then these faults outweigh the fancy systems by a long shot.

Good point, and this from the man who says FFVII sucks hehe

Title:
Post by: Leon_1990 on November 26, 2005, 09:05:49 PM

but...FFVII DOES suck...

It's story wasnt so amazing, it was merely masked under a few interesting characters.

FFVIII and IX both ahd good stories.. (unfortunately, VIII had boring characters...)

Title:
Post by: Master Yoda on November 26, 2005, 09:23:31 PM

.....but i love FFVII *sob sob* :(

Title:
Post by: Dragonium on November 26, 2005, 09:34:34 PM

Braaawgh!!

I say that cool systems are an added bonus. With them, a good game is even better, and a bad game is still a bad game. Multiply 0 by 2, and you still have 0.

And Draggy is everyone's little bro, so quit bickering. :)

Title:
Post by: DragonBlaze on November 26, 2005, 09:37:12 PM

Well one aspect won't make a good game, you need a good balence in all the aspects. A CBS won't make a good game, and a good story alone won't make a good game. However a game with a CBS and a good story, will probably be good.

Custom systems adds originallity to the game, playing with the DBS over and over gets dull after a while, and anything new just makes the game more interesting and usually more fun.

Title:
Post by: Master Yoda on November 26, 2005, 09:42:07 PM

Dragonblaze has a valid point

and we love u Draggy

Title:
Post by: Red XIII on November 26, 2005, 10:42:03 PM

Good one for Dragon Blaze, he has a great point. A good game isn´t just a sistem or a story: it´s both things and how they work together what it matters.

Title:
Post by: MrMister on November 26, 2005, 11:02:17 PM

All FF stories are pretty random, just random crap popping up every ten minutes.
Back on topic, fancy systems do make a game fun. I could play a game with no story at all. I'd prefer not to..

You read books to hear stories, and you play games to have fun.

Title:
Post by: blaman on November 26, 2005, 11:15:06 PM

I think that a good story, many unique characters and side-quests. Lots of secrets too. Also, challnging monsters and dungeouns.

Title:
Post by: DragonBlaze on November 26, 2005, 11:15:13 PM

 

Quote

You read books to hear stories, and you play games to have fun.

Well said :)

 

Quote

All FF stories are pretty random, just random crap popping up every ten minutes.

It may seem random at first, but it usually all ties together at the end. Its all planned out and connected, theres hardly any  random stuff just thrown in the game for no reason.

Title:
Post by: Almeidaboo on November 27, 2005, 01:58:50 AM

Suikoden = Great Story, great system, original, crappy graphics - awesome
Final Fantasy 10 = Crappy Story, great system, orginal, awesome graphics - crappy game.

Basically, what makes the game, IMO, is the story.

Right now I´m playing Suikoden Tactics (Rhapsodia) and it has (kinda) bad graphics, but the story´s so good that it doesn´t matters...

Title:
Post by: DragonBlaze on November 27, 2005, 02:12:54 AM

 

Quote

Suikoden = Great Story, great system, original, crappy graphics - awesome
Final Fantasy 10 = Crappy Story, great system, orginal, awesome graphics - crappy game.

Basically, what makes the game, IMO, is the story.

Its more then the story, as you can see, Suikoden had a good system and was original which helped it to be a good game. FFX, had a lot more wrong with it than its story. The main character was a wimp, the story wasn't that original, the gameplay was extremely linear, the dungeons were repedetive.

A good story is only 50% of a game. If all a game has is a good story, its still failing in my book. Too many people think a good story will pull their game through, and then other aspects of their game are lacking and the whole game turns out poorly.

Title:
Post by: drenrin2120 on November 27, 2005, 02:18:23 AM

Ok, you all have good points, but the basis of a game IS the storyline, so it would make sense that a good storyline makes a good game. Sure, if a CBS is there, we ALL want to suddenly play it. But even I have to say, the DBS is getting rather annoying. That's why ppl are using different gfx andsuch to try and make it look different. But really, if you have a good story, with a good twist, and interesting characters, the DBS shouldn't even mater.

Especially for idiots like me that can't make a CBS. lol :p

Title:
Post by: FFL2and3rocks on November 27, 2005, 03:35:44 AM

I prefer gameplay above everything else. If the game is fun to play but has a piece-of-crap storyline, I'd still play it.
But for RPG Maker, I'd like to see lots of custom stuff so that all of the RPG Maker games that I've played don't seem the same. I also like games that have things to do after you beat it.  Bonus dungeon, hard-to-reach ultimate equipments, etc.
Puzzles are nice, as well! But as long as there aren't a whole lot of OMG-HOW-THE-HELL-DO-I-SOLVE-THIS :guns: !!! puzzles. But those types can be good if there are a few of them; gives a nice sense of accomplishment. :]]

Another thing that I prefer that an RPG has is difficulty. I don't want to kill a boss in two turns. On the other hand, I don't want it to be so tough that I have to go level up for fifteen hours....

Title: Good Story Ain't Everything, but it SURE HELPS
Post by: Kilyle on November 27, 2005, 05:12:16 AM

Quote

You read books to hear stories, and you play games to have fun.

I play a game to hear a story.  Period.  Characters and story (and they are intimately linked) are the only things that make a game interesting enough to play from beginning to end.  And sometimes the end dungeon is enough of an endless grind story lull that I give up before the end anyway.

What gets me interested in a game?  Word of mouth is good.  Unusual or intriguing graphics on the back of the box, or on the download page--especially character graphics, but also battle system graphics or scenery.  The description might mention an idea or a world that piques my interest ("Hmm, never thought of that before").

If I somehow get a chance to play the game without any preconceptions, it is the "ooh, what happens next?" factor--and that means STORY.  The Story Factor is absolutely what keeps me going in the game.  A close second is the Han Solo Factor, where I attach to a character (never the main character; this usually happens when the main character bores me, or when a side character seriously outshines him/her).  At this point, the main story becomes filler and I cheerfully fast-forward to the next Han Solo scene, because I want to see what happens to him and how he deals with it.  A major annoyance is those stories in which the interesting side characters do not get enough screen time (what I might call the "Orlando Bloom" factor (ever read FoxTrot?) tho of course this applies mostly to a character and not the actor, altho I couldn't say that hormones weren't involved).

(I must note that, as a writer, I tend to spin wild yarns about characters and stories as I experience them: what could happen, where this all could end, what kind of a character this guy is, how he could prove to be more noble and useful than anyone ever thought he could be, etc.  This has the effect of sustaining me through a bad story long beyond the point at which my ideas become untenable.  Most of my friends and family members do not do anything like this, and give up on stories much faster than I do.)

At any rate, if a game does not have some measure of "ooh, what comes next?" or "ooh, what happens to him?", then it isn't worth playing.  This is, I think, the reaction that you want to provoke in your audience.


I have found a peculiar habit of mine while watching X-Files.  I prefer, by a huge margin, two major types of scenes (or, for that matter, full episodes).  One is Mulder getting beat up, kidnapped, or tortured (physically or emotionally).  The other is Skinner beating people up (or getting beaten up), going the extra mile to help the team even--especially--at grave risk to himself and his position, or experiencing strong emotions (out in the open, where we can see them).  I even rent DVDs just to fast-forward to those scenes and watch them repeatedly.  In many cases, the rest of the episode doesn't interest me at all.

After taking a good look at my reaction, I believe I have worked out what these scenes mean to me.  Most of the time, we get to see only a mask put on for the public to see--all the inner workings of the character are covered up, hidden.  The character is in control.  He is trying to prove that he is competent (according to cultural and societal norms), and more, he is trying to protect himself from the many ways in which he could be hurt if he reveals more of what he thinks and feels.  It takes a long time to get to a level of trust where that mask can be pulled off, and most people, I would venture, never ever get to that point with even one person during their lives.

Well, these moments of torture, of fear, of emotional strain, of being forced to beg, of being out of one's element and in enemy territory, of using methods and tools one is not comfortable with*--these are the moments in which the mask slips off, and we get to see the person inside, fragile and vulnerable and in so many ways just like us (even if the person isn't at all like us on a day-to-day level).  These are the moments at which we can connect with these characters, and more, come to truly understand them.  And it is these moments in which they seem the most human.  To pull an example from another source, what of those few seconds in which Sherlock Holmes thought that Watson had been shot?  The mask peels away and we see a deep love, an emotion that the logic-driven Holmes has never shown before and never (if I know my Holmes) shows again.

(*Skinner is used to accomplishing things with paperwork, moving within The System, following the rules, approaching people on a very formal and impersonal level.  This is what makes his abnormal scenes effective: He's not the type to beat people into submission, and not the type you would expect to try.)

So a major aim of the story is to get to the point where the mask peels off, where we get to see inside the character, catch him in an unguarded moment, connect with him and come to understand him.  This helps whether the character is hero or villain or anywhere in between*.  And if you can reach this point in a believable way, and write the scene well, you will connect with your audience and provide the sort of emotional fulfillment that they've been hoping for.

(*I love the Villain's Majordomo, that is, the second-in-command, in charge of all those little odds and ends that the Villain shouldn't have to worry about--I love his sense of honor and loyalty, his ability to feel for the victims when the Villain doesn't care (and his ability to steer the Villain away from certain high-casualty courses of action), and the fact that quite often he is reachable, redeemable).)


As for non-story issues...I agree with the "push spacebar to win battle" comment.  Altho I gave up on Brave Fencer Musashi (too taxing for my meager controller skillz), I do prefer what I call "action RPGs" to the traditional "command the troops" battle systems.  While I adore such games as Dragon Warrior III and IV, Final Fantasy IV and VI, and Phantasy Star IV, they have annoying repetitive battles, and only the really major battles are of any interest; the rest is mostly grinding.  But in games such as Zelda: A Link to the Past (I think I'm thinking of the right one), Secret of Mana, and Secret of Evermore, I get to actually participate in the battle, play a character, stay out of reach of the bad guy's fire attack, dart in to hit him from behind, place those bombs where I think he's going to walk over them, etc.  Not to say that these systems aren't at times frustrating (as pointed out, I lack controller skillz), and at times I have to repeat battles many many times, but better to be doing something during the battles than just trying to get thru them.  It's something like driving a stickshift vs. driving an automatic, or so my dad says (I don't drive): an automatic just gets you there, but a stickshift makes the journey fun, or some such.

The main thing that makes me still accept games with a "command the troops" battle system is that soloing an action RPG means you can only command one party member at a time; most seem to leave you with only one member, and the others (like Secret of Mana) have tiny parties with woefully bad AI.  I love having several characters over the course of the game, and there's no good way to have large parties with action RPG battle systems.

Eh, I'd mention a few other points, but this is already too long. :)

Title:
Post by: Shady Ultima on November 29, 2005, 12:16:19 AM

^ Someone thinks this is a university assignment...

In my opinion, the most important parts in a game, are the story line and how it is presented. A great storyline can be presented poorly, and thus the game will be poor. In my opinion, there should be a deep storyline that unravels as the game goes on, but it should come within short intervals, so you're not playing for 6 hours before you get to the next story scene.

Title:
Post by: Meiscool-2 on November 29, 2005, 12:28:59 AM

Meh, good story does make a good game, but originality I still think outweighs the storyline. Now, if the story is super cliche or sucks monkey balls, then I can see what many of you are saying, but I still think that a good system outweights a good story. And, I'm not just saying that because my game is an ABS.

Btw, thx for the complement on my screen Master Yoda. And yeah, FF8 had a really great story but crappy gameplay because monsters lvled up as you did, making lvling up sorta worthless, FF9 had the best gameplay but a really cliche story, not bad just predictible, and FF7 was sorta in the middle.

Title: Why Not Go All the Way?
Post by: Kilyle on November 29, 2005, 09:15:36 PM

If you're going to take the time to make a custom battle system, a custom menu system, a gameplay style distinct enough to make your game go down in history, why not take the time to also make a story good enough to bear the system out?  If you're talented at coding but not at making stories*, go ahead and collaborate with someone who can write the story and figure out the little subplots and sidequests that suit the overall plot.

(*I firmly believe that everyone is capable of telling stories, so it must be lack of practice or some cultural viewpoint that makes people "unable" to tell a good story.)

On my supergargantulossal, gigantilactic post up there...well, I've posted bigger.   :sweet:  But I was more eager to post than to refine and polish my presentation (which is what I often do with any post, which is why some of my posts take several hours to write, an amount of time and effort that seems unconnected to the amount of text--so you're right about my college thinking ^_^).  But I do hope that I raised some good points, at least. :heart:

Title:
Post by: Master Yoda on November 30, 2005, 08:27:05 PM

that was a very big reply