- Joined
- May 19, 2023
- Messages
- 130
- Reaction score
- 71
- First Language
- English
- Primarily Uses
- RMMV
RTP as the sole factor considered hardly makes a game bad, whether you’ll play it or not is up to you.
I find this disingenuous. Yes, it's just 1 thing (most of the graphics of the entire video game) but If I would have said "I don't play games that only use the default 10 skills that come with the game" would you have defended that? What if someone were to say "Making skills are a talent that take years to develop, and a lot of us simply will never have the time." I find it the same way as RTP.
Making a good combat system takes years to develop, skills that a lot of people will never have the time. Making interesting items takes skills to develop, and a lot of people simply will never have the time. Making a compelling story takes skills that take years to develop, and a lot of us simply will never have the time. Making interesting enemies take skills that take years to develop, and a lot of us simply will never have the time. Making good buffs and debuff states take skills that take years to develop, and a lot of us simply will never have the time. ETC.
So all those aspects of making a good game that take years to get skilled at that "a lot of people simple never have the time" to learn, and yet we draw the line at using default graphics? They are "good enough" even though hundreds of other games used them? Would you be saying the same thing if rpg maker came with 40 skills, items, states, armor, and weapons, and people treated it like the rtp? "Those are skills that take years to develop, and a lot of us simply will never have the time - the default 40 skills, items, states, armor, and weapons are fine". Where exactly is the line drawn here?
No, the graphics of a game matter just as much if not more than other aspects of the game. You don't always look at your items, or your armors, or your weapons, or look at status menus, but no matter where you look, you are looking at the graphics of the game. And if it's the same graphics as the other 400 bad games and yet yours is good, it's going to get lumped into the same category because well if it quacks like a duck...
Yeah, I understand that and I wasn't trying to delve into it. But OP asked:There are a million “RTP omg” threads so this does not really need to be another one, even if this is the off-topic section. RTP as the sole factor considered hardly makes a game bad, whether you’ll play it or not is up to you.
And imo, rtp graphics make a game bad - that's my type. There is a term every other engine uses and it's called an "asset flip" game. They have the same reputation as an rtp game, no matter the quality.Do you have your types for games that are poorly made?
Even if you don't have the money to buy asset packs, you have ms paint. You can download gimp for free. There are tutorials on how to parallax map. The information is out there, people just skip it because it's "good enough". But if that's good enough, do you expect to have a good battle system or story etc? Why focus on those things but not the graphics? A game is a whole package.
Just my opinion, and for the above reasons I think is valid.