What are keys to a successful game?

Joined
Jul 13, 2021
Messages
22
Reaction score
23
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMMV
I was going to make a long post, but I think less words will get the point across better.

If the developer isn't playing their own game for FUN then the game will certainly fail.

The original game developers were enthusiasts. Today, no one plays their own games for fun. Especially not their own RPG Maker games. Everyone is making their game for the wrong reasons. They're making it for validation, to complete what they've started, to create passive cashflow, and so on. But no one is playing their own game for fun. By fun, I mean "I've got an hour free, I can't wait to play my game more!" type fun. Not "I tested my game and didn't want to kill myself, so it must be fun!"

If YOU don't play your own game for fun, then why would I play it?
I have to tell you, I'm absolutely in love with this comment. I couldn't agree more. I'm guilty as charged for wanting to make money off my games, but that's of course because I work a 9-5 and if one day I made it big...(dreaming big here) I would finally be free to dedicate all my time to making games, which is what I really enjoy.

But one step at a time...
 

IArts

Villager
Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2020
Messages
12
Reaction score
18
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMXP
[...] I'm guilty as charged for wanting to make money off my games, but that's of course because I work a 9-5 [...]
I've read this type of statement several times on multiple forums and I recommend you (and everyone else) to stay away from this mindset. If you have good experience and know what you are doing, then there is no room to feel "guilty" about going commercial. This attitude has to stop in the RPG maker community. Acquire the right skills and/or team and you have all the rights to go commercial.
 

Basileus

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
Oct 18, 2013
Messages
371
Reaction score
531
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
When in doubt...graphics.

Nothing beats looking really pretty. Having amazing artwork will make people want to share screenshots of your game, and a lot of people will want to buy it just to see how nice everything else looks. It works in AAA and it works in indie. Pretty games just get attention so much easier.

Other than that, just being fun to play goes a long way. Don't feel like you need to cram in extra abilities or equipment just for the sake of having more. Don't feel like you need more dungeons or more cutscenes. If you can only think of 3 good dungeon ideas, then just go with that. Keep your best ideas, leave out everything that doesn't fit. Knowing not to overstay your welcome does a lot.
 

Danitinkis

Deadly and sexy
Veteran
Joined
Dec 31, 2016
Messages
128
Reaction score
82
First Language
Spanish
Primarily Uses
RMMV
So first off, as @Indinera said. What is successful? YOU put the definition on that.
We all gotta admit it; our games won't be liked by everyone. Everyone has their own tastes and may like one thing or the other.
What you should go for is for a product you really like, even if you're going to sell it commercially.
I don't know how to explain this but, for something to be successful it has to have some goals accomplished. Once you finish that goals, success will be achieved. And that goals are all up to you.
 

TheGentlemanLoser

"And when we fall, we will fall together..."
Veteran
Joined
Dec 30, 2020
Messages
338
Reaction score
451
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMMV
I was going to make a long post, but I think less words will get the point across better.

If the developer isn't playing their own game for FUN then the game will certainly fail.

The original game developers were enthusiasts. Today, no one plays their own games for fun. Especially not their own RPG Maker games. Everyone is making their game for the wrong reasons. They're making it for validation, to complete what they've started, to create passive cashflow, and so on. But no one is playing their own game for fun. By fun, I mean "I've got an hour free, I can't wait to play my game more!" type fun. Not "I tested my game and didn't want to kill myself, so it must be fun!"

If YOU don't play your own game for fun, then why would I play it?

This is just absolute nonsense, sorry.

That is not how any of these things work, not at all.

Anyway, right now the one key to a successful game I've chosen to focus like all of my available energies on is: a successful game is complete. Gots to finish something.

(OP, is your username a reference to the heroin addict dolphin Jones from William Gibson's "Johnny Mnemonic"? )
 
Joined
Jul 13, 2021
Messages
22
Reaction score
23
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMMV
This is just absolute nonsense, sorry.

That is not how any of these things work, not at all.

Anyway, right now the one key to a successful game I've chosen to focus like all of my available energies on is: a successful game is complete. Gots to finish something.

(OP, is your username a reference to the heroin addict dolphin Jones from William Gibson's "Johnny Mnemonic"? )
Nothing like that actually. Just some random dice roll of a name that I arbitrarily came up with. That said, I'm all for some Johnny Mnemonic.
I've read this type of statement several times on multiple forums and I recommend you (and everyone else) to stay away from this mindset. If you have good experience and know what you are doing, then there is no room to feel "guilty" about going commercial. This attitude has to stop in the RPG maker community. Acquire the right skills and/or team and you have all the rights to go commercial.

I respect that too actually. For the record I said I was guilty as charged for wanting to go commercial, not that I felt guilty. It probably sounds like splitting hairs but you won't hear qualms from me for making money.

That said it helps if you care about what you're doing, and I do.
 

Gallas

Villager
Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2018
Messages
17
Reaction score
15
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMMV
This is just absolute nonsense, sorry.

That is not how any of these things work, not at all.

Anyway, right now the one key to a successful game I've chosen to focus like all of my available energies on is: a successful game is complete. Gots to finish something.

(OP, is your username a reference to the heroin addict dolphin Jones from William Gibson's "Johnny Mnemonic"? )

So playing your game for fun is 'absolute nonsense'? And people wonder why the RPG Maker community is branded for mediocrity. The good news is that the mediocrity is tied to attitude and mindset more than the engine itself.

"That is not how any of these things work, not at all."

So what does work? Apparently, you say it is 'completing the game'.

Is success dependent on completing the game?

This begs the question, what is 'completion' of a game? How do you know when a game is 'done' and ready to ship? But what does it matter if a game is complete or not if it isn't fun to play? It'd be like a chef cooking food that no one wants to eat.

Most games begun are not completed. Why? Probably because the games weren't fun in the first place. If you and others enjoy playing a prototype for fun, then it is far more likely the game will get completed.

The truth is that the most successful games ever made were 'unfinished'. Shigeru Miyamoto has always been somewhat puzzled why 'Super Mario Brothers' was so successful because the game was unfinished.

I laughed when Notch's bank suspended his account because too much money was flowing into his name. This was back during early Minecraft alpha. The game was only 'complete' when Notch decided to declare it so. The alpha and beta already turned him into a multi-millionaire before the game was 'complete'.

I had the fortunate experience of testing very early versions of games such as Starcraft, Diablo, and World of Warcraft, e.g. strike teams and such. Blizzard developers never sat down and said, "Let us polish our game." The alpha versions were already highly 'polished'! How did this happen? It is because they were playing their own game for fun. They never stopped playing! And they would add in graphics and sound for their own enjoyment.

Now what was truly unusual was that once the game shipped, the Blizzard devs continued to play their own game for fun. If you look at a game such as Starcraft, not only did the expansion come out shortly afterward (the same year I think), you had years of patches and of 'maps-of-the-weeks'. The game literally evolved years after it shipped.

I remember when World of Warcraft was out, the devs would go home and log in to play just like everyone else. They never stopped playing their own game. It's why their games were so good.

When Breath of the Wild was being developed, Nintendo made everyone play the game for fun on Friday (and had others watched). There is a story where Miyamoto was playing a pre-alpha and all he did was climb trees! Up and down he climbed! "This is fun," he said. So they made climbing a big deal in the game. The game wasn't developed by applying 'the formula', it was developed by making fun prototypes and expanding on it. There's even an 8-bit Breath of the Wild prototype! And the result was a Zelda game that outsold all other Zelda games combined.

I have to think of some games that would never have come into existence had it not been for the developers playing for fun. Mega Man 2, developed entirely off the books and off the record, was made by young enthusiastic Capcom employees simply having fun with the Mega Man concept.

Or that the original Dragon Quest was made because the developers were addicted to playing Wizardry and Ultima and wanted to play such games on the home console.

What is the job of a game? It is to entertain people, to have fun. You have to program the organic computer, not the silicon computer. It is the player having fun that matters, not what is 'complete' or 'not complete' on the computer.
 

KenKrath

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
Apr 4, 2015
Messages
218
Reaction score
180
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
Nothing like that actually. Just some random dice roll of a name that I arbitrarily came up with. That said, I'm all for some Johnny Mnemonic.


I respect that too actually. For the record I said I was guilty as charged for wanting to go commercial, not that I felt guilty. It probably sounds like splitting hairs but you won't hear qualms from me for making money.

That said it helps if you care about what you're doing, and I do.
I'm sure the MAJORITY of folks make something in RPGMaker with some "hope" (not to be confused with goal) of becoming wealthy or making a small fortune. I don't see what there is to feel guilty about with wanting to make money.
 

ATT_Turan

Forewarner of the Black Wind
Veteran
Joined
Jul 2, 2014
Messages
2,780
Reaction score
1,630
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMMV
If the developer isn't playing their own game for FUN then the game will certainly fail.

...But no one is playing their own game for fun. By fun, I mean "I've got an hour free, I can't wait to play my game more!" type fun. Not "I tested my game and didn't want to kill myself, so it must be fun!"

If YOU don't play your own game for fun, then why would I play it?
I also disagree with this. Not because I think it's absolute nonsense, as a prior poster stated, but because I think it fits a niche mindset for this genre of game that isn't applicable to all people.

There are relatively few JRPGs that I have played more than once. Generally speaking, the pleasure in playing it is to experience the story. Once you've done so, you know what's going to happen, so for most people, there's not much reason to replay it.

Yes, there are some that are good enough that I've replayed, but over a time span of years, much as I might return to an old book I liked to read it again. I'm not going to say "I've got an hour free, I can't wait to re-read that chapter of The Dresden Files again!" Similarly, I'm not going to feel that kind of eagerness for a story-oriented game where I already know what the story is going to do. I've played Final Fantasy 6 once more since I first played it in, like, '98.

Now some people might feel that way, so your comment might be valid for you. And you can certainly use RPG Maker to design a game that isn't a story-oriented JRPG, but again, I don't think that's the presumed norm.
 

SigmaSuccour

Dogmatic
Veteran
Joined
Mar 22, 2017
Messages
272
Reaction score
1,092
First Language
Urdu, English
Primarily Uses
RMMV
Regarding the 'game should be fun' thing... A game, is a product.
What need that product fulfills... is something for you to decide.

Now THAT, can be entertainment. Which means, you may prioritize fun.

However, a game can be, and is, much more than entertainment.
A game is an interactive medium of information.

What does that mean?

Book = delivers information through text
Audio = delivers information through sound
Video = delivers information through pictures, sound, and text.
Videogame = delivers information through pictures, sound, text, and interactivity.

Just like a book can be: fiction, non-fiction, for entertainment, for education, for documentation, for different activities like coloring, puzzle solving, for developing a skill, for exercising a muscle, e.t.c
A game can be all of that as well. And much more.

Fun itself is not important.
What is important is what you want your product (game) to be doing (service). And who it needs to be doing it for (target audience).

Both your service, and target audience need to be very clear, for you to have a successful business. (Welcome to entrepreneurship 101.)

Now on a personal note: I don't want players of my games to go... "This is so much fun!"
I prefer they go, "This was a beautiful experience."

My target audience is people who don't have too much time to play games anymore. And want a condensed, single player experience, that gives them a meaningful and fulfilling story driven experience.
(This is a simplification. As there are some complications and details, which I won't go into unless asked.)

Here's an example of a review/comment on a 10-minute game I made for a game-jam:
Human (Discord comment for False Mercy).PNG

(Note: The guy is too kind, and is probably exaggerating. But still. XD )


Conclusion: Figure out a service for your game, and who it is for.
If you choose entertainment and fun as a priority, then beware, there are simply too many choices for entertainment, for a person.
Too. Many. Games. as well.
 
Joined
Aug 10, 2020
Messages
31
Reaction score
17
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
N/A
Hi,

from my perspective your game needs to meet the minimum requirement of quality and uniqueness first, especially when the game is done with the RPG-Maker engine. Just to name few factors:
  • Come up with a good story telling (with good characters).
  • Put effort into graphics. Your own graphics help you to reach the level of uniqueness. Put effort into the look and feel of the world, create different character poses etc.
  • It's not only about graphics but also music and sound. They influence the mood/scenario a lot.
  • Not necessary but a new and interesting game mechanic can invoke my interests.
When the product is done well, it's going to take you another additional step: Marketing and sales. Find your platform, target the right audience and try to reach them. There are a lot of digital channels to achieve that.
this
 

redmedved2

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
Nov 2, 2020
Messages
90
Reaction score
37
First Language
Belarusian
Primarily Uses
RMMV
I was going to make a long post, but I think less words will get the point across better.

If the developer isn't playing their own game for FUN then the game will certainly fail.

The original game developers were enthusiasts. Today, no one plays their own games for fun. Especially not their own RPG Maker games. Everyone is making their game for the wrong reasons. They're making it for validation, to complete what they've started, to create passive cashflow, and so on. But no one is playing their own game for fun. By fun, I mean "I've got an hour free, I can't wait to play my game more!" type fun. Not "I tested my game and didn't want to kill myself, so it must be fun!"

If YOU don't play your own game for fun, then why would I play it?
I might disagree with that, as such statements might just put all motivation away from 95% of the developers who read it. Like, it's a simple psychology: people play games because they are interested in something, because there are secrets in the game.

I spent 100 hours in Skyrim because I was interested in trying new spells, I was interested in exploring ancient ruins, learning people's stories, and especially developing my own abilities and skills because I was discovering new things and not standing still.
But over time you notice small details, such as the fact that those treasures that you find in the chests in deep dungeons are not too different from each other, and the scenarios themselves may also be monotonous.
But, what if I were Todd Howard? What if I were the one who wrote the script that puts identical loot into chests? What if I had originally known the script for all the quests? Would I have had any interest in playing this game?
And this is the question that should put everything in its place. You shouldn't be interested in playing your game at least psychologically, since you already know all the secrets, you already know all the strongest ability combinations and best answers in the dialogues, so I would just ask you not to distract people.

But at the same time it seems to me that your message is different. And the message is very important. In that your game should be interesting, not for you, but to be interesting in general.
Your game should be a tool with which the player could entertain himself. And it should have many secrets to unravel.
When Breath of the Wild was being developed, Nintendo made everyone play the game for fun on Friday (and had others watched). There is a story where Miyamoto was playing a pre-alpha and all he did was climb trees! Up and down he climbed! "This is fun," he said. So they made climbing a big deal in the game. The game wasn't developed by applying 'the formula', it was developed by making fun prototypes and expanding on it. There's even an 8-bit Breath of the Wild prototype! And the result was a Zelda game that outsold all other Zelda games combined.
And you can see this yourself. That guy hasn't played the story, because there were no secrets for him, but the game has the tools for the player to entertain himself. Maybe he was never ever trying to just climb the trees, and he tried various ways to accomplish this task. Because the game contains a tool, physics, and with it, you can do anything you want. I've seen a lot of videos about BOTW where people were doing the craziest things with physics. It's a very good example of the sandbox game.
The game gives you various tools - you can do whatever you want with them. And the more possible combinations and unexpected results - the more interesting the game.

In my game, players can use different combinations of spells that together give a new, never-before-seen effect. for example, if you use a curse on a burning enemy, his burning will be replaced by cursed flames. And if you then use ice magic on cursed fire, there could be, I don't know, a universe explosion (honestly, I haven't figured out all the combinations yet).
I don't tell the player about certain combinations, for it's a secret that the player have to know himself, I just give him a hint to mix a flame with a curse.

And the answer to the Todd's question as I think is: He would build catapults from the buckets and try different physics things, because it can still surprise him with bugs or other interesting things unlike the quests and the story. Or build a Skyrim-selling-machine from the cabbages.

But what about visual novels? There are no physics, there are no sandbox elements except for your choices. But people play it. Because of the secrets, they want to unravel. Because they want to know what will be in the end.
In the case of visual novels, you should in no way be interested in playing your game at all, in my opinion, but that's absolutely fine. Because others are interested.

So I think you are trying to make a very important and useful thought, but I just decided to clarify things from my point of view.
From my point, I want to give the player as much "physics options" as I can. To maximize the number of possible outcomes. Basically, what I call a "sandbox" the way I see it. And also fill your game with secrets that should interest the player to discover them.
 

Gallas

Villager
Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2018
Messages
17
Reaction score
15
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMMV
I might disagree with that, as such statements might just put all motivation away from 95% of the developers who read it.

I don't understand how that would de-motivate anyone.

I also don't understand how someone can identify as 'developer' but not want to identify as 'gamer'. No one bats an eyelash if someone said, 'Successful writers are great readers.' Aren't successful game developers going to be passionate gamers? It sure fits the pattern!


But, what if I were Todd Howard? What if I were the one who wrote the script that puts identical loot into chests? What if I had originally known the script for all the quests? Would I have had any interest in playing this game?

I don't know anything about Todd Howard. I haven't played Skyrim. But I don't have to. Like Todd Howard, I'm also a child of Ultima. Based on that, I have a good idea of what he is trying to do with his games.

I understand your question is rhetorical in nature. But I do the literal. I would go and find out what Todd Howard's answers are to your questions. If I couldn't find such answers, then I might even resort to asking him myself. How would I do this? I'd find a way.

This is something I don't see many people here do. They do not (at least I'm given the impression) research how the great RPGs were made in the first place. What were the developers thinking? How did they do it? You'd think people would ask that before they embark on a half-decade long sacrifice making their own RPG. I found your answer within five minutes through a basic google search. The questions you ask have already been answered by Todd Howard himself.

The following quotes are from this interview in 2018. Bold is my emphasis.

Whenever we do a game, whether it’s one we made, or looking at Fallout, we’re going back and looking at that and reinterpreting it. Even if we did it. When it comes to Elder Scrolls VI, you’re looking at Skyrim and Oblivion — I replay all the old games. How do we want it to feel this time?
Todd Howard literally is saying he is replaying old games like Skyrim and Oblivion.

It’s usually the experience of the game. What does it feel like to play it? We have a list of the big features we want. Some of those we get married to and some we don’t. It’s more of a vibe. This is the tone of the game. This is what it feels like to play it. If we haven’t nailed that — features can come and go, as long as we’re paying off on that vibe.
Here, he is saying the features and systems are secondary to the 'FEEL' of the game. The 'FEEL' of the game is what it feels like to PLAY it.

I play less this year because we’re shipping. I end up watching things on YouTube or Twitch or Mixer. I’ll watch people play, just to expedite the process. I still play games all the time. I love Fortnite. I play on my phone, my iPad, anything. I play a lot of Madden football, which might sound weird. That’s American football. It’s only once in a while that I go in to do research, where I want to see how somebody did something. I just love the art form. I play for fun.

I like when time passes very quickly. I’ll realize I’ve been sitting there for three hours, and that’s when I know I’m really into something. That’s when I know with my own games. You’re not just developing it. You’re playing it at work to test it, and you realize you missed dinner. “What happened to the last three hours? I think we’re on to it now.”
Todd Howard is literally, direct quote, saying he plays games all the time and that he plays for FUN.

And you're 'not just developing it'. He knows he is doing something right when, playing his own game, that he realizes he missed dinner. How can that not be interpreted that he is playing his own game for fun?

I didn't know anything about Todd Howard's thoughts before I made this post.

I respect everyone's opinion. But why not research and find out what the successful game developers themselves thought and did to create success? There are tons of interviews available. They all share a similar mindset.

I ask myself, "What are these top game devs doing that the RPG Maker devs aren't?"

And the most important difference came to mind: They play their own games for fun.
 

redmedved2

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
Nov 2, 2020
Messages
90
Reaction score
37
First Language
Belarusian
Primarily Uses
RMMV
I don't understand how that would de-motivate anyone.

I also don't understand how someone can identify as 'developer' but not want to identify as 'gamer'. No one bats an eyelash if someone said, 'Successful writers are great readers.' Aren't successful game developers going to be passionate gamers? It sure fits the pattern!




I don't know anything about Todd Howard. I haven't played Skyrim. But I don't have to. Like Todd Howard, I'm also a child of Ultima. Based on that, I have a good idea of what he is trying to do with his games.

I understand your question is rhetorical in nature. But I do the literal. I would go and find out what Todd Howard's answers are to your questions. If I couldn't find such answers, then I might even resort to asking him myself. How would I do this? I'd find a way.

This is something I don't see many people here do. They do not (at least I'm given the impression) research how the great RPGs were made in the first place. What were the developers thinking? How did they do it? You'd think people would ask that before they embark on a half-decade long sacrifice making their own RPG. I found your answer within five minutes through a basic google search. The questions you ask have already been answered by Todd Howard himself.

The following quotes are from this interview in 2018. Bold is my emphasis.


Todd Howard literally is saying he is replaying old games like Skyrim and Oblivion.


Here, he is saying the features and systems are secondary to the 'FEEL' of the game. The 'FEEL' of the game is what it feels like to PLAY it.


Todd Howard is literally, direct quote, saying he plays games all the time and that he plays for FUN.

And you're 'not just developing it'. He knows he is doing something right when, playing his own game, that he realizes he missed dinner. How can that not be interpreted that he is playing his own game for fun?

I didn't know anything about Todd Howard's thoughts before I made this post.

I respect everyone's opinion. But why not research and find out what the successful game developers themselves thought and did to create success? There are tons of interviews available. They all share a similar mindset.

I ask myself, "What are these top game devs doing that the RPG Maker devs aren't?"

And the most important difference came to mind: They play their own games for fun.
After all your studies of real Todd interviews, I was even a little ashamed, because the question was really rhetorical and my knowledge of real Todd is only at the level of memes. In fact, you already know about him 5 times more than I do, because at the time of writing it was only his connection to the game as game director that mattered to me, not more. After all, of course he didn't write the scripts for the game, and neither did the story or the quests.

But it's not in my nature to find out how different successful games were created and google the lifestyles of successful individuals, all I do in terms of improving my game is to imagine myself as a player and think how would it be more interesting to play the game. And that's completely enough for me. Just create a game that would be interesting for you to play if someone else made it. But if I try to learn from other people's mistakes, reading "how to create the best game ever" books, I just feel that I'm living like a machine, it's not interesting to me.

And to be honest I do not understand whether there is any understanding between us, perhaps in terms of our experience we are just talking about things familiar to us and in fact do not understand what the other is trying to tell, but I will say this: game development - it's a game for the developer. I enjoy coming up with new and unique mechanics, I sometimes find it really funny when I come up with a joke or a funny situation and put it into a game. I like to create. But, excuse me, do I then enjoy playing my game and laughing at the same joke over and over again, or going through the same quest that you created yourself hundreds of times? Absolutely not.

Maybe I'm just broken and all normal people can play their games and enjoy them even though they already know all the secrets of their games. But for me, it's just unnatural. I first and foremost try to be honest with myself, so I can't just believe that I enjoy doing test runs, changing the enemies stats and replaying the same level dozens of times. I can't pull up a smile and laugh from one joke over and over again, even though I was honestly laughing at the moment it was created. And for me that's okay because I know what I'm interested in and what I'm not, which is what creates the balance in my game development, alternating between the fun, entertaining moments and the repetitive and boring ones.

And since there are so many people in the world with different interests and bugs in their heads, I can assume that there are also those who can play their own games for fun. And if you really believe what you're saying, I wish you the best of luck with that, even though I can't feel it myself.
 

Drake616

Veteran
Veteran
Joined
Oct 8, 2020
Messages
36
Reaction score
8
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMMZ
Generally a good "bait" is what does it, like an interesting story/character/event premise or set of mechanics. Once you've been hooked into the concept and want to find out more it's out of the devs hand how long the charm lasts for imo.
 

Milennin

"With a bang and a boom!"
Veteran
Joined
Feb 7, 2013
Messages
2,991
Reaction score
2,223
First Language
English
Primarily Uses
RMMV
First, it depends on your definition of 'successful'. But, going by this:

1) Definition 1 - successful in terms that people play it and enjoy it.

2) Definition 2 - monetary successful. Does it make a marginal income / pay for itself / make a profit?
It's easy to say the primary key to making a successful game is to make a good game. The secondary key is by advertising your game, so people can actually find out about your game.
From there, if your game is good (as in being fun enough to play to the point where people are willing to pay for it) and enough people learn about the existence of your game and then spread it through word-of-mouth, your game will become successful. This should work 100% of the time. So if your game ends up failing to meet expectations, either your game wasn't good enough, and/or not enough people learned about its existence for it to spread.
 

Latest Threads

Latest Posts

Latest Profile Posts

I'm just so close to replacing LUK with a different stat, maybe DEX but we'll see.
Slapped together a title screen and working on some dungeon clutter + portraits for Dubhghaill and Einar. Usual CW for minor body horror wrt Einar
QVLJIgD.png

OaPcYUy.png

r55FiUJ.png

EIgO94y.png
cT1V4nb.png
>studying for months for an exam
>does exam
>waits 3 months for the results to come out
>me trying to login, incorrect password
>I get recovery password
>me trying to login, incorrect password

What the heck. As a son of a Karen, I'm going to file a few complaints.

Forum statistics

Threads
117,145
Messages
1,104,938
Members
153,214
Latest member
jzu1999
Top