What are you tired of seeing in RPG Maker games?

[Seacliff]

Hmmm... let's see if I can explain this:


It has to abide to the rules of the world set and not place humor above story. For example, LotR is a good fantasy. It's far from being 'realistic' but it's 'believable', like you said. I'd hate to see Frodo joke about how Gandalf fell down the mines. Just, don't!


I've seen a few RM games around that are very anticlimatic when it comes to this. Humor is good (and even necessary) but when it starts to get in the way, it just ruins it for me. Not my style. I get it's a game and it's fantasy but please, take it seriously! I cannot immerse myself in the world otherwise -.-"

Alright, that makes sense.


Nothing wrong with a short comedy based game now and again. but I do want the characters in the game to at least take serious events seriously.

 

[Euphony]

- Over the top aggressive female characters that are rude just because.

In a similar line of thinking...tsundere characters (who are almost always female). I hate hate hate this archetype and it's in almost every JRPG. I think if people called it what it really was i.e. bipolar ***** instead of giving it a cutesy Japanese name, it wouldn't be as popular.

This is a dumb question, gamers do not love to see anything.

 

[Corrupted Ralph]

Alright, that makes sense.


Nothing wrong with a short comedy based game now and again. but I do want the characters in the game to at least take serious events seriously.

This just made me think of a RPG version of Deadpool... 20 hours of gameplay purely ******ed dialogue... ohh god...

 

[Makio-Kuta]

In a similar line of thinking...tsundere characters

All my ""tsundere"" characters have been male I think, ahahaha. (and not really Tsundere anyway. Next up, the moe male.)


Some of these responses shock me! Like the treasure chest one. You really are tired of seeing rpgs reward you? @resquinox what would you use to reward the player in its place to reward a player for exploration of a dungeon or other map?


I agree on the amnesia thing though. On one hand, I understand it as a mechanic to bring your lead to the same headspace as the player - so having things explained to you makes sense, but yeah--- it's way overused, but not just in RPGmaker games; in ALL media. (that was why I specifically subverted that trope in You&I. and made the double whammy of amnesia a lie the entire time.)

 

[Corrupted Ralph]

All my ""tsundere"" characters have been male I think, ahahaha. (and not really Tsundere anyway. Next up, the moe male.)


Some of these responses shock me! Like the treasure chest one. You really are tired of seeing rpgs reward you? @resquinox what would you use to reward the player in its place to reward a player for exploration of a dungeon or other map?


I agree on the amnesia thing though. On one hand, I understand it as a mechanic to bring your lead to the same headspace as the player - so having things explained to you makes sense, but yeah--- it's way overused, but not just in RPGmaker games; in ALL media. (that was why I specifically subverted that trope in You&I. and made the double whammy of amnesia a lie the entire time.)

Crafting systems could do this quite well for the treasure chest. You can place rare crafting materials in that place instead. You don't even really have to have a crafting system, but rather have a NPC who will make the rare gear for you. That way you could easily escape the norm. You can also include lore spots that have mobs defending chests, or maybe traps. The thing that I was saying (and maybe him...) was that having random treasure chests in the middle of nowhere with no protection is stupid because why has nobody else taken it? With the rare material you could simple shrug it off as nobody knew what the herb was, and with the guarded lore chest stuff you could say it was too dangerous for them to investigate the chest etc.

 

[Makio-Kuta]

@Corrupted Ralph mmmm I guess I don't really see the difference between these things. It's just dressing the same concept in another coating. But then I've never been a big pusher of 'realism' in games and care more about it being fun. So the idea of an untouched chest doesn't bother me - it's a symbolic representation of a loot point more than an actual wooden structure. I certainly wouldn't see a treasure chest in a cave and have my first thought be "I'm sick of these things!" it would be "yay treasure!" ahaha


Lore spots are an interesting suggestion, but not every player is going to think getting the rewarded with some lore is exciting or worth their efforts. Everyone likes a new sword ;D


Anyway, thanks for answering my curiosities. 

 

[Wavelength]

To answer your question @ain:


I agree/understand most of what you are saying so I only have one question:


"Pile of Stats" enemies (in fairness I guess this is moreso the underuse of creative troop/enemy design)


Could you explain exactly what this means? 


A "pile of stats" enemy is one that doesn't do anything unexpected or interesting, but only differentiates itself from other enemies based on how high its stats are.  It might as well not even have a name or picture, but just be a pile of numbers.  You generally see this term used for turn-based games, since action-based games tend to give enemies different movement/attack patterns that make them feel different from one another.


There is certainly some room for a few "pile of stats" enemies in any game, especially one that includes a lot of unique battle mechanics.  But there are a lot of RPGs that almost exclusively use Piles of Stats as their enemies, and it makes the experience feel derivative and predictable because of its overuse.

 

[AwesomeCool]

@Wavelength - I find that pile of stat enemy happens due to the minimum amount of strategy the party skills give.


Give a character a damage fire spell and a damage ice spell doesn't really count in strategy imo (just spam whatever the enemy is weak to).  Plus the fact that most games don't really use utility skills much (they are either to weak, a padding skill between increased damage skills that are useless, and/or non-existent) and how little states are used in general, generally just adding the generic ones like poison, confusion, stun, etc and then proceed to make them useless in the cases that they would matter anyway (EX: poison is only useful on high HP targets that take more then 3 or so turns to beat and those are generally restricted to state immune bosses).


All this leads to enemies having no choice but to be piles of stats.  Cannot really add the strategy to avoid those types of enemies after all, besides enemies that rely on gimmicks (which generally become a one time thing, that is the only time the player uses a certain skill and that ends up being binary land devolving to a pile of stats for most of the turns anyway).

 

[Wavelength]

@Wavelength - I find that pile of stat enemy happens due to the minimum amount of strategy the party skills give.


Give a character a damage fire spell and a damage ice spell doesn't really count in strategy imo (just spam whatever the enemy is weak to).  Plus the fact that most games don't really use utility skills much (they are either to weak, a padding skill between increased damage skills that are useless, and/or non-existent) and how little states are used in general, generally just adding the generic ones like poison, confusion, stun, etc and then proceed to make them useless in the cases that they would matter anyway (EX: poison is only useful on high HP targets that take more then 3 or so turns to beat and those are generally restricted to state immune bosses).


All this leads to enemies having no choice but to be piles of stats.  Cannot really add the strategy to avoid those types of enemies after all, besides enemies that rely on gimmicks (which generally become a one time thing, that is the only time the player uses a certain skill and that ends up being binary land devolving to a pile of stats for most of the turns anyway).

Just my personal observation - while I've seen Piles of Stats and overly-basic player skills that lack strategy appear together in games, I don't think that one causes the other - I think they're both symptomatic of a lack of creativity in designing battle mechanics.


Several of the mid-generation Final Fantasy games are good examples of (mostly) basic player skills combined with quite a few creative enemies/troops - FF8 in particular comes to mind and it keeps the player on their toes enough to make battles more interesting and enjoyable.  Eternal Senia did this well in a semi-action format.  I'd hold these games up as good counterexamples (or at least exceptions) to the idea that strategy can't be present without interesting skills.


On the other end of the spectrum is creative player skills/mechanics combined with Pile of Stats enemies - this can work well too as long as there aren't way too many random encounters.  Jade Cocoon and Skies of Arcadia feel like pretty good examples here.  Once you experience too many encounters in a game like this though, it can start to feel stale again.


Persona 3 occupies a strange space in that its skills and non-boss enemies were extremely basic in their mechanical design, but the rules of battle had large enough wrinkles that that it kept the players on their toes.

 

[freezingfeathers]

Well, default tiles. xDD


Its the thing that makes it too... generic. 


This is still acceptable, the worst thing is to use a default map!  It is like "I've played the same map a thousand times, and I have to do it again?!". 


Secondly I'm tired of seeing the exact same monsters too! lololll~ I've seen great maps with parallel mapping but the monsters... Oh well, Slimes everywhere :v


I understand the budget and the time taken to complete the game, but it would be great to give it a change if it is within your ability.   

 

[taarna23]

I can't honestly say I have much of anything that I'm "tired" of seeing... It's all just different ways of telling a story, some more effective than others. But I can say what I'm seeing in this thread is basically a growing list that ends up comparable to this one: http://project-apollo.net/text/rpg.html

 

[Makio-Kuta]

@taarna23 Yeah, the list is quickly changing to "things you see in every RPG" and something less RPGmaker specific. But since most RPGmaker games are RPGs, I suppose that's understandable. In other news, it's been a while since I read this list.

 

[Archeia]

In a similar line of thinking...tsundere characters (who are almost always female). I hate hate hate this archetype and it's in almost every JRPG. I think if people called it what it really was i.e. bipolar ***** instead of giving it a cutesy Japanese name, it wouldn't be as popular.

I like the Tsundere archetype (e.g. Tohsaka Rin and Stella from Chivalry) to some extent since some of them are good and isn't needlessly aggro compared to Love Hina tsundere and some others. But I agree with you when they start punching the male protag for every single time they hit on a girl is so stupid.


I remember playing an RM Game once the creator mentions that people will love his female characters and are representative of women. Then I played it and the main character was an aggressive ***** that kills almost everyone and insufferable. Oh she also worships a female satan and it was like. you can't be serious??? (they seem to be are)

 

[Little Adventurer]

I'm tired of seeing everything deconstructed. For example, "Oh! The Orcs are peaceful and would be okay if it was't for those evil nasty humans!"  and ALWAYS portraying humans as all evil scumbags just because we *gasp* hunt animals and actually try to defend our families from them. Nevermind that it's YOU attacking US as well, and self defense.

 

[Makio-Kuta]

@Archeia I think I know which game you're talking about. Yeah... people misunderstand what a 'strong' female character means and that one was a good example of it. If it is the same game, I actually felt offended by what the game and creator were trying to suggest about writing good characters.


@Little Adventurer I haven't personally seen too much of that in RM games. But I also haven't binge played a lot of demos in a while now. I wonder if it's a byproduct of people getting tired of the reverse, because jump back a few years and the reverse was certainly the more common trope.  Orcs were evil because they were orcs; you were good because you are the hero (almost always human). Interesting to think that a flip of that might become the new standard for the reason people got bored or tired of the original way. (Which'll mean it'll flip back eventually?? hmmmm)

 

[Archeia]

@Archeia I think I know which game you're talking about. Yeah... people misunderstand what a 'strong' female character means and that one was a good example of it. If it is the same game, I actually felt offended by what the game and creator were trying to suggest about writing good characters.

Yes! It is that one!

 

[Little Adventurer]

I'm just saying... it's either one way or the other. It's never in the middle, it never has both races have flaws AND strengths, just one or the other. Either one race is evil and the other good, or the flip happens.


Maybe it's me becoming jaded because of Twilight saying "all humans are inferior" (which is another trope I dislike, humans shouldn't be looked down upon like that but they always are by fantasy races like Elves), but I'm sick and tired of seeing "all humans are X" because, well, I'm human. I know humanity has it's badasses and it's *******s, but not everyone is one or the other. That's what makes us unique.

 

[nio kasgami]

Hum I will try to add my pitch of salt here...don't mind my bad english :/


I think I follow a little @Archeia point of black and white...


I don't like this idea of the people always doing the good because they are good or the evil because they are the MEANIE evil monster etc. 


I mean the concept of "good" and "evil" is a pretty theoretic concept. What's good for a group can be Evil for the other side and vice versa.


if we take the concept of the holy crusade  who actually used a lots in games. The concept of one side is the good and fight for the glory and the honor of the Good side then the other side is evil and impure ect the side who should not live and blabla.


Although if we take the "evil" side...for them the "good" side is the evil one because they destroy their village...they murder their families. They actually defend themself.


Actually the answer to this "complicate" question is mostly "being different".


The concept of evil and good born from the incomprehension of the both side and got in a  arguments so they decide to fight each other thinking BOTH are the "good side".


When actually both side are neither good or evil ....they are just different it's how I interpret the "Gray" zone.


I actually use this concept in my game "The last Oni" a game where you play as Leandre the Young sister of the Hero Ralph who vanquished the evil overlord. Leandre is actually a "templar" who fight against the Oni thinking they are the evil one and she's fight them for the side of light. until she's meet Lucia a Oni and actually begin to doubt about who's the true "evil" for discover both of them are actually neither good or evil just two race who got in bad terms.


Anyway's let's not brag to much xD....

 

[Makio-Kuta]

@Little Adventurer No worries! I wasn't disagreeing, I just found it rather fascinating. I like viewing the trends of tropes over time in things.

 

[Valryia]

I'm sick of seeing the "gray" mentality myself. It is nice that we moved from a pure black or white mentality, but most pictures aren't entirely gray, either. A picture encompasses all three, and color. So, where is the color?


Oh, and something about tropes in general. Tropes are tools. You know ye olde "Knight, Dragon and Princess" Trope? It's usage is not the problem, but how it is used. Light example here being Mario & Co. Never forget that fun comes first.


Reused art assets are a widespread problem, not just for the RPG Maker. I just need to think about Steam Greenlight and it's million of Unity blocky zombie "games". The problem is that uneducated people are buying them. If noone would buy them, noone would sell them. (Making them is another story entirely.)