What are the #1 mistakes that RPG Maker games make?

[GammaVector]

Hm... I might be alone in this, but what about amateur games with voice acting? I don't mean borrowed voice clips from other professional games, but the creators' own voice acting. They get credits for efforts, but many of them sound really awkward and unsuitable for the characters.

Aaauuugh! Bad voice acting. Holy crap, yes. I would so much rather imagine the characters' voices in my head. Unless you have some seriously talented people, just don't do it. A game with no voice acting is FAR superior to a game with bad/mediocre voice acting.

I heard this many times already. Does this means you want a side-view battle system?

I want a less boring battle system. The battlers for the default system are completely static. The animations are bland and uninteresting, and they have no real effect on the (completely static) battlers. Every battle looks exactly the same. Even the attacks blend together after a while. It's boring! Give me some movement! Something! Honestly, even something as simple as Yanfly's battle engine is a great improvement; adding damage popups and icons, colored text etc.


A simple sideview is even better. Yanfly's visual battlers allows you to put the characters at the bottom of the screen, even. So you can keep the forward perspective, but still throw in some action. Even with the default enemy battlers, it's alright. With sprite battlers, it's as good as sideview. And of course, if you're really going for it, Victor's Animated Battlers can't be beat (though Tankentai is a damn close second).


EDIT: The skills are another factor. The default ones are kinda terrible, tbh, and using them tells me that you didn't really want to put much effort into the battle system. Now, if you game has very little combat, it might be okay. But honestly? If the developer didn't want to bother with making the battle system interesting and unique, why would I assume he bothered with the plot and characters?


That's not to say all the default skills are bad. In my game, I'm still using a few of them (like Cleave) that do their job and do it well. But enough of the skills and mechanics have changed that it's not the same-old, same-old anymore. I don't want the players to know every skill and enemy by hear just because they've played a bunch of RPG Maker games.

I can't figure out how to loop the music properly. Bummer.

Oh, honey. Here: http://forums.rpgmakerweb.com/index.php?/topic/9251-how-to-make-looping-music-the-right-way/


It's very simple to do.

 

[Mr. Detective]

Not sure if someone else already mentioned this, but a few games out there have really terrible font. I don't know if they chose it just for the sake of being different or not, but it's really hard to read. The default font works well and it looks easy on the eyes. Some of the other ones are just awful.

Honestly, even something as simple as Yanfly's battle engine is a great improvement; adding damage popups and icons, colored text etc.

Uh, that might probably help. Your complain is a little unfair. Making sprites for every single enemy battler in a game is really hard, and an average RM user won't be able to do that.

Oh, honey. Here: http://forums.rpgmak...-the-right-way/
It's very simple to do.

Yeah, I saw that before, but thanks. The issue is that I can't figure out the right time to loop the track. Also, I have quite many tracks, and looping them all is pretty time-consuming. I could use that time to work other aspects of the game.

 

[GammaVector]

Uh, that might probably help. Your complain is a little unfair. Making sprites for every single enemy battler in a game is really hard, and an average RM user won't be able to do that.

That's why I mentioned Yanfly's Visual Battlers. If you set it up so that the actors are at the bottom of the screen, you can use the default enemy battlers and it looks pretty good. Combined with Yanfly's Battle Engine, it's not bad at all. Much better than the default system, and with very little effort.


Especially if your skills and enemies are interesting and not too clichéd, it's a very nice system for most games.

Yeah, I saw that before, but thanks. The issue is that I can't figure out the right time to loop the track. Also, I have quite many tracks, and looping them all is pretty time-consuming. I could use that time to work other aspects of the game.

Not all music can be looped. Most music can, but it's difficult to find the timing and doesn't always sound great. Music that was written to be loopable is best. Most video game music is written that way. Kevin MacLeod has written a lot of royalty-free loopable music. Google him and see what if you find something that'll work.


And yes, it is very time-consuming to loop all your music. That's why I think it's best to save that work for after the demo is out. But still, it's important to do it eventually. The effort makes a huge difference to the player.

 

[Cozzer]

You know, after reading this... I'm afraid to release my game. Seriously though:

Don't worry, in this thread we are being nitpicky for the sake of being nitpicky.

I still don't get why using script for things is a problem, if the result is the same. I'm a programmer, and in most cases for me scripting is way, way, WAY easier and faster than eventing, and it also usually produces cleaner results.

Anyway, if you don't like Xenogears' pacing you should check "spend-half-an-hour-describing-what-characters-are-eating-for-dinner" Fate Stay Night, or "spend-half-an-hour-describing-how-characters-seat-around-the-table" Umineko.

Visual novels are on a whole other level of slowness.

It's true that there are a lot of game in which characters often talk for the sake of talking, with no new information or character development being given.

I guess these kind of cutscenes are made for the kind of audience who already likes the characters and finds pleasure in just watching them interact. You have to be very good at writing dialogue, though. And your characters have to actually be interesting.

 

[Zoltor]

Being able to save wherever the hell you please. Allowing saving on the world map is bad enough, but RM games tend to allow something far worse then that, saving in dungeons(without even the need of a save point, just anywhere the player wants). It's just plain bad game design.

Which brings us to the most common problem of them all, "Lazy eventing" People need to spend more time with eventing.  Making a few decent maps, and just throwing some scripts in(lol that in most cases aren't even being fully utilzed) doesn't make a game good.

 

[Kes]

There is an extensive thread on this aspect of saving which gives cogent reasons for allowing this including the demands of RL. It's not as clear cut as you make out

 

[Cozzer]

I certanly hate not having to repeat the last hour of the game when real life forces me to stop playing. What are the developers thinking.

Expecially in often-buggy and not-perfectly-balanced RM games, I can't stand when a game doesn't punish me for its own faults.

(Now, it's true that being able to save anywhere can lead to some unwinnable situations, but if you don't want to bother with a quicksave or autosave funcion it's still better than the alternative.)

 

[Diretooth]

I can understand bad voice acting. Having a bunch of people whose voices are grating on the nerves, not to mention the fact that some don't _______ E-NUN-CI-ATE really ticks me off. I've recorded my voice to VA a game of mine (that I accidentally deleted) and while my voice wasn't the best, at least I could enunciate well enough that I was understandable.

Anyway, voice acting should be a thing to include if you're absolutely comfortable using it/doing it. Good voice acting, such as work done by internet legend Omahdon, or anime legend Vic Mignogna, can be very difficult to come by free, and usually costs a lot of money, (Unless you can somehow convince a good VA to act for your game, which I don't advise,) but if you can get it, it can do wonders.

But, I'm rambling incoherently. In short, bad VA = bad. Good VA = good.

Oh! And gratuitous foreign languages! If you're using a foreign language, but do not know how to translate it well, or God forbid, you use an internet translator, then you're wasting your time. It can, however, be justifiable if you use it properly. (Me, I just make up my own language for the story. Runic, which exists as an example in my signature, is the only one that I've worked on as far as syntax and wide-use.)

 

[Dalph]

Don't know if this was mentioned or not (I'm too lazy to read everything now) but I still hate it like the pest:

The SS Battlers issue (Staring and Smart) 

Spoiler

Battlers for a Frontview used for a Sideview BS, they stare directly into the soul of the player and complete ignore the characters...creepy stuff.

 

[Ksi]

I just remembered the biggest pet peeve of mine, something that all, even seasoned RPG Maker devs have done:

Stairs that are the same height as the cliff or wall it scales.

Think about that for a second.

If you were to see it from the side, it would look like part of the wall had evenly spaced triangles protruding from it. It would essentially be stairs that are at a perfect right angle from the ground. Unless you have spiderman feet with insanely strong gluteus maximus muscles, there is no way you can climb up or down those stairs standing up.

Except that we don't see it from the side, we see it from a top-down perspective which, and I measured with the steps and spaces intimated between them - that the rule of equality is right. So, you know, there! ;p

(One step in-game is equal to about a metre in distance. Thus, one step tile is equal to two 50cm stairs. We don't see the incline thanks to the way the graphics are made, but rest assured that they are equal in size/height. It's frankly ridiculous to have it popping out in the way because it not only doesn't equal in height but also doesn't look good; so, again, there! XD )

 

[GammaVector]

Don't know if this was mentioned or not (I'm too lazy to read everything now) but I still hate it like the pest:


The SS Battlers issue (Staring and Smart) 

Spoiler

Battlers for a Frontview used for a Sideview BS, they stare directly into the soul of the player and complete ignore the characters...creepy stuff.


Ahahaha~


It's fine if it's a demo and placeholder graphics, but when people actually release final versions of the game this way...Yeah, it's pretty terrible. I like how you put it, "stare directly into the soul of the player," lol.

 

[TheRiotInside]

Except that we don't see it from the side, we see it from a top-down perspective which, and I measured with the steps and spaces intimated between them - that the rule of equality is right. So, you know, there! ;p

(One step in-game is equal to about a metre in distance. Thus, one step tile is equal to two 50cm stairs. We don't see the incline thanks to the way the graphics are made, but rest assured that they are equal in size/height. It's frankly ridiculous to have it popping out in the way because it not only doesn't equal in height but also doesn't look good; so, again, there! XD )

I don't mean to sound like a jerk, but seita is right. If you have a cliff that is two tiles in height, placing two tiles of stairs on it is enormously incorrect. On a 32x32 tile, there are 64 pixels of cliff, while technically only 32 pixels of vertical height on the stairs (assuming the stripes of horizontal and vertical stair pieces are even, which is pretty standard). It would be like they said, triangles pointing out from the cliff, aka, ridiculous!

I sound like a wet blanket here, as you were clearly having fun with your post, but when I see this in games it is infuriating...I couldn't resist, haha.

EDIT: Technically, the only way that it would work (having the same amount of stair tiles as cliff tiles) would be if the cliff wall was actually on a 45 degree angle.

 

[Demiqas]

What do you pretend? A JRPG without cutscenes? Play FPS or Racing games if you don't like cutscenes. 

Remember also that if you dislike them then you dislike good storylines too (yes, because you can't make good storylines without a lot of cutscenes).

Ofcourse, I have nothing against cutscenes, I am talking specifically about (too) long cutscenes.

 

[Dalph]

Ofcourse, I have nothing against cutscenes, I am talking specifically about (too) long cutscenes.

It's ok, I was a bit of an a**hole there (I admit it), sorry about that guys. XD

But I still think long cutscenes works better and are overall more appealing (I prefer to be deep involved into dialogues).

 

[Ksi]

Alright, about the steps. They are as tall as they are thick. Look at them at a side-on view - they would be built like the ones in minecraft. That means that side on they are as tall as the cliff tile is. It's just the angle they're drawn in that causes them to look odd. I'll draw a mock-up to show you what I mean if you don't understand (tomorrow, though). Technically, the one-per-one is correct, it's really just the angle that causes the issue. (I'm rather dogmatic about this stair thing because people have bothered me about it for a while now but, well, you'll see what I mean I hope.)

I don't mean to sound like a jerk, but seita is right. If you have a cliff that is two tiles in height, placing two tiles of stairs on it is enormously incorrect. On a 32x32 tile, there are 64 pixels of cliff, while technically only 32 pixels of vertical height on the stairs (assuming the stripes of horizontal and vertical stair pieces are even, which is pretty standard). It would be like they said, triangles pointing out from the cliff, aka, ridiculous!

I sound like a wet blanket here, as you were clearly having fun with your post, but when I see this in games it is infuriating...I couldn't resist, haha.

EDIT: Technically, the only way that it would work (having the same amount of stair tiles as cliff tiles) would be if the cliff wall was actually on a 45 degree angle.

No, but the stairs are. If you look at the tiles they are the same height as they are wide, thus, they are at a 45 degree angle. This makes each one-tile step as tall as the wall tile with it. Thus, one-per-one. Thus, same height is fine. It really is the angle they're created in (there are so many issues with that top-down angle, if you look at it all from a realistic style. For example Barrels vs people's heads vs holes vs doors vs... yeah...)

 

[Sharm]

Okay, maybe if I explain the steps thing using just cliff tiles it'll make more sense.

On the left we have the way that is correct. The number of cliff wall tiles used in the steps is the same as the number of cliff wall tiles for the non-step part of the wall. As you can see the steps take more vertical mapping space than the wall does.

On the right we see the incorrect method. Both the tops and the wall tiles used in the stairs are used to determine how tall the wall is. The steps and wall take up the exact same vertical space on the map.

On the right is what some people are saying happens when you leave the stairs the same height as the wall. The top and bottom become tilted and the whole thing is much more like a ladder than steps. It seems like this is what would be happening because the top and bottom are taking up the same vertical space they did in the other direction and they are spaced the same way they were in the other view. However, if you did angle the bottom away like that it would be completely invisible from the front view, completely hidden behind the top of the step.

On the right is what it would look like if you just couldn't tell how far it was sticking out from the front view, the way that fans of this method are saying would happen. As you can see the spacing between the steps suddenly becomes two wall tiles high, a physical impossibility. The only way to make it look like stairs again would to either increase the number of steps or decrease the height of the wall. Both of which would make it not match the front view.

Mapping the steps the same height as the wall is WRONG.  There is no way to map it in side view that matches the way it "works" in front view.

 

[Ksi]

You're all assuming that the wall itself isn't seen from the same angle. How else do you account for being able to see the top of the jutting rocks? Because it's not a straight-on cliff face. It is seen also from the same pseudo 3/4 view. :/

Frankly, there's so much wrong with the tiles when comparing them to realism that you might as well never bother or just make your own. Trees the size of humans? One-metre+ per step? (A step in-game is equal to the height of the charaset which is equal to a person which is about - averagely - 1.6 meters high. That's the distance you cover in one step... A basket is that big in-game.) Yeah, the scaling is all wrong - because it's not realistic. You can try to make realistic maps but that doesn't mean it's gonna work that well.

The best you can do is make it visually 'viable'. If that means same-height steps up a cliff face so that bloody steps aren't sticking out the top or bottom? Another way to 'fudge it' is to make half-tiles at the bottom so that it appears to stick out a little but not enough to get in the way of walking. Or at the top. Or both if you really want that extra tile of height. :/

 

[Makio-Kuta]

Everything in top down view is totally messed up and skewed. @.@

 

[Sharm]

Ksi, if the top image wasn't meant to be stairs, and I was just mapping cliffs, which side would be correct?  Which side would get me in trouble for unmatched wall heights in the Screenshots thread?

Makio-Kuta, it is an odd thing, but not as much as that link suggests.  Zelda games aren't in 3/4ths perspective and have been fudging it from the very beginning.  3/4ths is physically possible to mockup in 3D.

http://lpc.opengameart.org/static/lpc-style-guide/_images/60perspective.png

 

[Ksi]

That is different, Sharm. Why? Because you're adding extra width as well as height. The cliffs are already at the 3/4 angle as they are, giving them their own 'width' so to speak. The stairs already have that width included in their tile.