RPG Maker Hate /:-(

[Geoff Moore]

The only problem with RPG Maker is that it's too awesome.

 

[GrandmaDeb]

RPG Makers strengths and its weaknesses are identical: It allows anyone to make a game. Unfortunately, this means a lot of people who should never make games, make games with it.


Which means there are a TOOOOON of bad RPG Maker games, that sour people on it. Honestly though, the hatred has really gone down a lot, it used to be much worse.

Which argues for more recognition for GOOD games. Maybe a "seal of approval" or a top 100 list to stay on.


But yeah, I have a class full of kids making games. Some of these kids are downright gifted, and some are just enjoying themselves. If all of them post their games, are you really gonna judge the game making engine on that? Not logical. That's like judging a hammer based on a store with some bad furniture.

 

[Seacliff]

Who here heard of Victim of Xen? I partially blame that for the bad rap people give commercial RM games. (It's on Steam)

Seriously, it has it ALL (or in this case, none):

-Cliche story AND bland characters

-BTW, the 'story' I mentioned above has no intro, you are just thrown into the game

-No custom resources, it's all RTP

-Rude creator who snaps at anyone criticizing his game

-Nothing interesting about the game at all, town are there just to be there and battles are just boring

If it was all meta about this and was a freeware RM game, it would've been fine. But some people just think they can throw there first RM game on steam and expect people to like it and grab a few bucks while there at it.

 

[_Shadow_]

Who here heard of Victim of Xen?

I am glad I read the comments on Steam.

 

[bgillisp]

Who here heard of Victim of Xen? I partially blame that for the bad rap people give commercial RM games. (It's on Steam)

I had to finally tell steam to stop recommending that game, as it kept thinking I'd like it due to all my time on RPGMaker. Thought I've also seem some others on steam that are getting good reviews even, so the rap is not all negative.

 

[Seacliff]

I had to finally tell steam to stop recommending that game, as it kept thinking I'd like it due to all my time on RPGMaker. Thought I've also seem some others on steam that are getting good reviews even, so the rap is not all negative.

It's not, but some people assume an RM game is complete shovelware crap just because it's made in RM, and I think VOX had a part in that.

But there ARE quite a few good RM games on steam, I'm looking forward to You are Not the Hero myself.

 

[Foron]

There's a whole topic discussing the "hatred".

Bottom line: do not care about these people.

I think we should.

 

[Foron]

Hatered will never die, but who cares about YouTube comments??? They mean nothing.

Umm, I've never seen any comments, it's usually videos (and some end do up thinking otherwise)

And to the OP, I think the problem is how the the program is/was advertised.

Its usually advertised to be a very easy-to-use program.

However, the ads say less "requires to to training to use" and more "even a 5 year-old can make a game out of it"

So as a result, people buy it, think they'll be swimming in money (ironic, considering most non-indie come out...less than polished), not realizing that it's still an extensive process.

This results in bad RM games, and our credibility lowering.

 

[bgillisp]

So as a result, people buy it, think they'll be swimming in money (ironic, considering most non-indie come out...less than polished), not realizing that it's still an extensive process.

That's funny that people would even think that, considering I figure for my first commercial game I might not even break even. But, I've wanted to make this game for 20 years, and I'm using the money I would have spent on video games to play to fund it, so even if I end up with a loss, I have zero regrets.

 

[whitesphere]

(Concerning caring about the RPG Maker haters)

I think we should.

All we can do as developers is make the best game we possibly can.  We have control over that ---- the resources we choose to use, the quality of our map  (my biggest weakpoint), the quality of our story, the balancing of the battles, the level of polish put into every aspect.

And, if we choose to be commercial or otherwise share our games with others, it is important to listen to and address any honest criticism/bugs/etc.  That is as long as it is something WE have control over and we feel the game would benefit from it.

However, even for a commercial developer, that is where our responsibility ends.  If someone has had bad experiences with poorly made commercial RPG Maker-built games, and tars all RPG Maker games with that brush, there is no way to address that person's hate.  Unless you consider rewriting your entire game into some other game engine (assuming you have the legal right to use said resources in that game engine) an acceptable answer. 

So I agree that we should NOT care about the player who hates RPG Maker games from the word Go.  We SHOULD care about players who have issues or want changes but who aren't that opposed to RPG Maker.

 

[Foron]

(Concerning caring about the RPG Maker haters)

All we can do as developers is make the best game we possibly can.  We have control over that ---- the resources we choose to use, the quality of our map  (my biggest weakpoint), the quality of our story, the balancing of the battles, the level of polish put into every aspect.

And, if we choose to be commercial or otherwise share our games with others, it is important to listen to and address any honest criticism/bugs/etc.  That is as long as it is something WE have control over and we feel the game would benefit from it.

However, even for a commercial developer, that is where our responsibility ends.  If someone has had bad experiences with poorly made commercial RPG Maker-built games, and tars all RPG Maker games with that brush, there is no way to address that person's hate.  Unless you consider rewriting your entire game into some other game engine (assuming you have the legal right to use said resources in that game engine) an acceptable answer. 

So I agree that we should NOT care about the player who hates RPG Maker games from the word Go.  We SHOULD care about players who have issues or want changes but who aren't that opposed to RPG Maker.

Good point. But I always feel that it sucks that people paint all bad RPG Maker games the same, despite great ones like Dreaming Mary and Mad Father (I know the the later is in another engine, but both have a common purpose).

Maybe it's because I seem to run into this type of thing a lot, but I always want some to look at the good ones, and give it the benefit of the doubt.

Once again, I see what you're saying and I agree. I just wish it's going to be like how no one's going to ignore CryEngine 3 because of Sonic Boom: Rise of Lyric.

 

[BlackLiquidSorrow]

The way I see it, if someone said something along the lines of "This game sucks and you suck for making it!" then there's really nothing to gain from listening to them. If someone was offering legitimate criticism on your game, then they're not really a hater, are they?

 

[GrandmaDeb]

Meh. The internet is full of opinions. People in general are full of opinions. And generally speaking they are worth about what you pay for them. =D


(of course I am not speaking of the valuable C&C we get from our dear friends here at web dot com!)


Are you here to make money? Seriously, you should probably first go to school, mow lawns, or get a day job; while some folks do make money, they have paid their dues and worked their way up to their success. If you are willing to do the same, you may achieve similar success, and I hope you do! [=


But most folks are here for fun, friendship, and a cool hobby that puts us in the drivers seat of video gaming.


Let the gripers gripe. For some people, that's their hobby.


And you never know what will catch on, after all.


A blue and tan dress??? Or is it black?


Chibi's may be next, lol.

 

[Foron]

The way I see it, if someone said something along the lines of "This game sucks and you suck for making it!" then there's really nothing to gain from listening to them. If someone was offering legitimate criticism on your game, then they're not really a hater, are they?

It might be just me, but even in comments like those, I feel there's some actual critique in there (not much, but it's there).

 

[whitesphere]

It might be just me, but even in comments like those, I feel there's some actual critique in there (not much, but it's there).

It depends on the type of comment.  The "This game sucks and you suck for making it!" doesn't tell you a thing other than the person hated the game.  It doesn't answer Why.

Now, if someone said "The game sucks --- the graphics are crap, the battles are waay too easy/hard, there are too many bugs!"  that at least gives you things to address.

That's why one of the best things you can do is find a friendly playtester who will test your game and tell you any issues s/he has with the game.    The best test results give specific details like "The party gets stuck behind the green house in Findar" or "The Barbarian class is overpowered, he can destroy Dragons in 2 hits, by himself."

If critics don't give at least enough information so we can start fixing the problem, they're just haters and I'd completely ignore them --- after all, what can you do to address a broad "The game sucks!" comment, without knowing the real problems?

It's like asking someone to solve any problem.  They need specific information. If your car has problems, and you bring it to the mechanic and only say "It's broke!  Fix it!" the mechanic may not even know where to start to fix it.  But, if you say "The car runs rough when idling and stalls if I try to go over 30 MPH," that gives the mechanic good, solid information so s/he can find and fix the problem.    Or if you go to the doctor, you don't just say "I'm not feeling well."  You describe your exact symptoms, giving the doctor vital information about what to do.

That's why I carefully separate the "Legitimate criticism which highlights problems that I can fix" from "Haters who just want to dump on the game, without saying what they would want to change."

 

[Foron]

It depends on the type of comment.  The "This game sucks and you suck for making it!" doesn't tell you a thing other than the person hated the game.  It doesn't answer Why.

Now, if someone said "The game sucks --- the graphics are crap, the battles are waay too easy/hard, there are too many bugs!"  that at least gives you things to address.

That's why one of the best things you can do is find a friendly playtester who will test your game and tell you any issues s/he has with the game.    The best test results give specific details like "The party gets stuck behind the green house in Findar" or "The Barbarian class is overpowered, he can destroy Dragons in 2 hits, by himself."

If critics don't give at least enough information so we can start fixing the problem, they're just haters and I'd completely ignore them --- after all, what can you do to address a broad "The game sucks!" comment, without knowing the real problems?

It's like asking someone to solve any problem.  They need specific information. If your car has problems, and you bring it to the mechanic and only say "It's broke!  Fix it!" the mechanic may not even know where to start to fix it.  But, if you say "The car runs rough when idling and stalls if I try to go over 30 MPH," that gives the mechanic good, solid information so s/he can find and fix the problem.    Or if you go to the doctor, you don't just say "I'm not feeling well."  You describe your exact symptoms, giving the doctor vital information about what to do.

That's why I carefully separate the "Legitimate criticism which highlights problems that I can fix" from "Haters who just want to dump on the game, without saying what they would want to change."

Good point. But why list them as haters (I'm asking this because I keep thinking of the celebrity definition, where it's anyone who doesn't 100% like their music)? 

 

[Engr. Adiktuzmiko]

On the idea about any engine being capable of producing bad products:


Yeah, that is true. But you don't get to see a lot of bad games made with the powerful commercial engines out there as compared to the ones made in RM. Now why?


1) Price. RM costs way less than those other engines, so a lot more people can get their hands on them


2) Piracy. At least I do think that there would be a lot more users of pirate Ace/RM than pirate of other stuff


3) Ease of use. It's faster to make a working bad game in RM than making a working bad game in other engines. Somehow, a working bad game gains more hate than a non-working game.

 

[Foron]

2) Piracy. At least I do think that there would be a lot more users of pirate Ace/RM than pirate of other stuff That's true. In fact, I once did that myself.

3) Ease of use. It's faster to make a working bad game in RM than making a working bad game in other engines. Somehow, a working bad game gains more hate than a non-working game.  I think it's because that means they KNOW how the engine works, and they could fix it, but just don't want to.

 

[bgillisp]

@UltimateFanboy: I don't know if they know how to fix it and just don't want to. Go to youtube and type in bad rpg maker games, and see some of those games that are LP'd. Some of them you wonder just what the creator was on when they made it!

For example go look up gulpy gulpy, or space invaders (the RM game). Both of those games make you wonder if the whole game was made while sick or drunk or something.

 

[Gui]

Well, maybe both...