What can be done to make RMMZ to have overwhelming positive reviews?

[Kupotepo]

@ImaginaryVillain, ok, sorry to hear that. But anyhow,
Can list what you have in MZ, so have specifications and no deviation to make things the same?
Anything different will create doubt of the evidence finding.
@??????, you are too, please create the common test project, so we can compare the results. Thank you for your observation.

 

[ImaginaryVillain]

It was listed in the first few profile posts. Though to recap, default projects with no plugins, MZ had 7 events set to play the Magma sample animation that comes with Effekseer (parallel, wait till finished, plus 60 frame additional wait time). MV with 30 events (same settings) playing the 60frame Explosion animation from the AnimationCollection2Quantum pack.

That's literally it. You should be able to replace either with any large animations and see similar results. I intentionally picked animations around 1.4-2mb for the test. And heavily slanted it in favor of MZ giving it only 7 events (it averaged 20FPS) to MV's 30 events (60FPS average). Just so people wouldn't question the results.

For what it is worth, I was using the trial version of MZ from August. So that is an unfortunate X factor. I welcome anybody else's results, ideally MZ would perform better after two patches which would be great news.

 

[taarna23]

@ImaginaryVillain I'd love to test, but after saving that one in the appropriate format, it doesn't seem to play in MZ at all. I haven't played around in animations at all, so I may simply be doing it wrong.

 

[ImaginaryVillain]

@taarna23 The process is kind of awkward, pretty certain this was the video I saw on how to setup it up.

edit: Never mind, I found the actual video I used.

 

[Kupotepo]

@ImaginaryVillain, I am just using 7 events set to play the special shoot animation play by autorun. lol, not learning the Effekseer right now, sorry.
MV is using shoot special animation 7 auto events.

Here is MZ

Here is MV

My finding is that MZ is a little 3 fast and not freeze, but MV gets freeze. lol, the CPU and GPU quality might be the factor.

 

[taarna23]

I see what you're talking about. Is it an issue with that particular animation, perhaps? It does end up being multiple (per animation, no less) persistent 3D models present at the same time. I tested with a couple of the default MZ animations and it wasn't nearly as bad. The worst dip I saw was to 44 (as opposed to the 22 seen from the magma animation), and that was only on the beginning of the first time the set of animations played. After that they only dipped to around 55.

 

[DoubleX]

Other than that, there are marketing strategies that generate reviews, like sending free "review copies" to popular reviewers, but YMMV. Unless you're on the payroll, though, that's not really within your ability (or responsibility IMHO).

Maybe we can point out(in an even more constructive manner) what the RM officials can do even more to legitimately boost the review scores

as a side note: I think it should be down to the rm devs to fix the issue with it. Why should we, as paying customers, have to go out of our way to fix the product we paid for?

I'm just thinking that, if we push ourselves even harder than we already are, maybe this will benefit us as well as the rest of the community at the end(so it can be about our self interest as well):
1. Something even better's done in RMMZ
2. Its review scores become closer to overwhelming positive
3. There are more RMMZ users
4. The sales of RMMZ increased, benefiting the RM officials
5. The number of users using resources from the same resource makers increased, benefiting those resource makers(sometimes it's increased profit as well in the case of paid resources)
6. The number of good RMMZ games might increase, benefiting the RM game players
7. The number of good resource makers might increase, benefiting the RM resource users
8. etc
So, ideally, by legitimately boosting the RMMZ review scores, the whole community can be benefited at the end

That said, there's a small saving grace in that my purchase of MZ came with MV, so... if another month or so goes by and MZ is still looking problematic, I may just do my game in MV instead.

I'd also wait for another month and check how good does RMMZ do again, and if it still doesn't look good by then, I think RMMZ could be in trouble

That said, mixed reviews on a tool like this are not especially uncommon. People speak the loudest when they're unhappy. The majority of people that hare happy with the program will never leave a review. Those happy with it will largely not say anything at all because content and using what they've got.

I'll just show some numbers as references:
1. Right now RMMZ has 148 positives and 82 negatives, netting in a 64% review score
2. The 1st month of RMMV has 108 positives and 27 negatives, netting in a 80% review score
3. The RMVXA has been having very positive to overwhelmingly positive reviews right from the very start, and this has persisted uptil now(and I think it'll continue to be this positive)
(I think the even older makers are too old to have their numbers meaningful for RMMZ, even though they still mean a lot on their own)
So, actually, RMMZ has 148 - 108 = 40 more positive reviews, but also 82 - 27 = 55 more negative reviews, than RMMV in the 1st month, so it seems to me that, in the case of RMMZ, it's more than just happy customers being silent
In short, while I'm still optimistic on the future of RMMZ, especially if it goes get improved even more drastically over time, but right now the numbers don't look good no matter how I look into them, and I just wonder whether something more can be done to make the review scores become legitimately better within a shorter amount of time

 

[ImaginaryVillain]

@taarna23 It's entirely possible. My testing with Effekseer is hardly exhaustive, and my knowledge of it's workings are rudimentary at best. There is an initial frame drop as it caches the animation/particle effect in either system (assuming you use the base system). So I allowed both to run until they maintained the same frame rate.

I admit I'm trying to stress it intentionally partially to see what Effekseer can do, since I'm always looking for a better tools. But also because I need MZ to achieve at least 20,000 PIXI particles on a map, with pixel movement, dynamic lighting, 100x100 maps and 8 frame per direction character animations at 60FPS.... Just to get it to match what I already have with MV. At which point it then needs to do better than that to give me a reason to switch.

Sadly the 20,000 PIXI particle test with 4 direction movement, normal sprites and no dynamic lighting... Was a colossal failure. As weird as it is, MZ handles particles badly, even PIXI particles. But what makes that strange is PIXI 5's particle handling is actually much improved... So I have no clue what happened with the implementation in MZ to cause that. It does mean they can improve it though, if they want to.

@Kupotepo The reason you're experiencing lag/freezing like that is you have your events set to Autorun. Which should correctly force a lock up, as they are supposed to prevent everything else from running while they resolve, meaning two should never operate the same time. So what you're actually seeing is a bug in MZ that is allowing it to try to run multiple autorun events instead of normal autorun behavior.

Also as your test appears to be some kind of animation vs animation test, and not a test of Effekseer vs animations, it's not actually relevant to my results as you have tested something different. I'd ask how you setup your animation vs animation test, and suggest people run that test as well.

Though to my knowledge MZ doesn't even allow animations without a plugin, which we can easily dip into the plugins available for both and get all manner of results. But unfortunately that doesn't provide conclusive results about the base engine, because plugins can literally make any conceivable alteration to the engine. So we'd in fact be testing plugins with even more X factors and thus even more inconclusive results.

 

[Kupotepo]

I'd ask how you setup your animation vs animation test, and suggest people run that test as well.

I am not understand you well. Would you like me to share the testing project with others? I think it would be a great idea to just make sure it is not about graphical card and processor issues.
‐--------------------------------------------
My Method of Maddness:
In MZ, I create 7 events and place them randomly. Each with play special shoot animation by using show animation command.
Also, I select the player of target of the animation.
Then, I set each event to autorun.
Click playtest and click F2 button.

In MV,
I create 7 events and place them randomly. Each with play shoot special animation by using show animation command.
Also, I select the player of target of the animation.
Then, I set each event to autorun.
Click playtest and click F2 button.

 

[ImaginaryVillain]

You can share if you want. Mostly I'm asking you to describe your testing setup so that others can duplicate it, because it's testing different things than mine was. So others may wish to test it and see if they get similar results.

 

[Kupotepo]

If @taarna23 hypothesis is correct, we should talk to Effekseer about their software or if it is just one animation lol then. I do not think it is important enough to ask them fix on one animation sample. They might be able to help us or workaround solutions.

@ImaginaryVillain, I write the steps on top. I hope the members understand well of what of I write.

 

[winkr7]

RMMV improved alot by update 1.5. After 2 or 3 updates RMMZ will look better since RMMV isn't getting any more updates. Part of switching to RMMZ will be that RMMV is update dead.

 

[Tsukihime]

I think performance tests should come with downloadable projects so that we can reproduce it on our own machines. It's easier that way, especially if it's just default project we can just pack up the data folder and pass it around

 

[rooge]

I have no problems with the program after 150 hours of use (unexpected crash, lags, etc.), everything runs smoothly but that I definitely didn't get any WOW effect from it.

It's more because not all the changes were absolutely necessary for me, such as new animations or a different tiles look. However, this is not a reason for me to give a negative rating of how it happens in reviews.

I would like to be able to switch between animation styles directly in the editor than to use a plugin for the older system (just as you switch the front view and side view for the battle). So far, I can't get used to the new way. It may look better on a smartphone, but I'm creating everything for the desktop, and there the two different styles on the bigger screen don't give me a complete, unified impression.

Man. I feel like I'm the only one around here that likes a lot of MZ's tiles.

I'm sorry, but that was the first thing I kicked out of the tileset folder.

The problem with Steam is that many users would give the products offered there a neutral rating.
Please let us give "Neutral" Reviews

That's how I want it too. Because I feel the same way about the MZ. If the MZ offered me the possibility of at least some (even partial) adjustments and changes to the layout of all menus in the game without the need to use plugins, it would be thumbs up guaranteed from me. That would be a major change that many users would appreciate (because it really hasn't been in older makers yet).

Personally, I don't think it will be possible to change the opinion of those who have written negative evaluations, especially when they use direct comparisons with the MV, because they are convinced of their truth.

MZ also can't rely much on new users who haven't worked with older makers yet. There are also small things that are not related to the MZ at first glance, but can affect the final impression. For example: when it was decided by developers to change the style of the tile and then sell Trinity as a DLC for MZ it is really silly (especially when Trinity complies with MV RTP). I also explained to the outraged people how to back up the generator when changing things from Trinity and why they don't have all the character sheets when they have pictures for it. And this already negatively affects the perception of the MZ itself.

I think that a big share in the mixed evaluation is also due to a rather bad advertising campaign before the release of the MZ and where did the first hate reactions begin - one of the first things they told us was the return of 4 layers .... so it really made me laugh too, because I thought that they make fun. I don't judge anyone for being upset about that. I would expect that as a bonus, not as a building block of the campaign. First they had to start with a presentation of how they rewrote the code and its direct comparison with MV (but it couldn't be a video for a few seconds). And gradually add more news. They killed it right at the beginning.

You should not take the rating on steam seriously for now, especially if in some negative reactions MZ is rated poorly for paid and obfuscated VS plugins. VS Team probably p....d a lot of people.

 

[Kupotepo]

@rooge, I just learned about Steam Curators. What is that? Are they the influencer and reviewer? Thank you for explaining to me. I feel like they have the voice of the comumer lol.

 

[Milennin]

I like MZ, but coming from MV, it doesn't feel like a huge upgrade over it. Less incremental improvements over the previous versions would be a good start to getting better reviews, I guess.

 

[rooge]

I just learned about Steam Curators. What is that? Are they the influencer and reviewer? Thank you for explaining to me. I feel like they have the voice of the comumer lol.

For me, curators are more influencers than reviewers - they usually publish few lines of text with a summary of what the impression was of the game for them and then either mark the product as recommended or not. You have to choose a curator and follow him / her and then you will be shown their opinions on the products they used. I know from personal experience that everything is almost always recommended.

For the MZ, my curator Bingo 7 wrote: „If you are interested in game development, RPG Maker MZ is probably the right engine for you: easier to learn, ton of upgrade (characters creation, better scripts, animation) and optimization.“ He recommended it.

 

[DoubleX]

The problem with Steam is that many users would give the products offered there a neutral rating.
Please let us give "Neutral" Reviews

That's how I want it too. Because I feel the same way about the MZ. If the MZ offered me the possibility of at least some (even partial) adjustments and changes to the layout of all menus in the game without the need to use plugins, it would be thumbs up guaranteed from me. That would be a major change that many users would appreciate (because it really hasn't been in older makers yet).

But then it'd mean something like 148 positives, (my wild guess)300+ neutral and 82 negatives for the 1st month, and it still doesn't seem to look good

 

[winkr7]

Nobody wants to read a neutral review. I usually just read the negative ones that have lots of likes.

 

[Tai_MT]

My personal perspective:

I dreaded the launch of MZ since it was announced. I made several lengthy posts about it needing to do X, Y, and Z in order to be good and worth the price for me. I've been railing on the downfall of the maker for quite some time (we still have missing features from RM2K, which WOULD BE GREAT TO HAVE BACK, WHY WERE THEY EVER REMOVED YOU AVACADO SUCKERS?!).

To that end, I still preordered the super massively expensive bundle with all the bells and whistles because... Well, I rail on the program because I love it. I want it to better, and as a dev, it is difficult to watch a business make... silly decisions and expect to be paid. Much as I hate all the missteps of the program, I still love to work with it.

So, here we sit.

I have MZ and it's... not even an upgrade to MV. All the "promised features" on the store page are:
1. Blatant lies.
2. Clever wordplay trickery.
3. Not as advertised.
4. Not as impressive as they are made to sound.

Now, I will be quite fair here. I got the program, loaded it up for about an hour and looked around in it. I made a couple sample events and didn't do much else with it.

I honestly couldn't find much different with it and MV. We get an extra layer, sure, but what is that good for? I honestly couldn't find a use for it, when the program wasn't designed with usage of that extra layer in mind. That is, several items were duplicated from one layer's set to another. Why do I need that? What am I meant to do with this?

So, I found the program itself to be very "lacking". It's passable. Serviceable. It feels like a minor upgrade to the previous version. It doesn't feel like the same jump from VX Ace to MV (a jump so significant that I actually remade my entire project in MV because I liked it a lot better and its features worked better for what I wanted to do with my project).

I have no desire to even work with MZ at this point. The program itself is very underwhelming and I'm old enough now that I don't need to "cheerlead" for a company and its product line. They don't need me to defend them or their decisions. I don't need to justify my bad purchases. I'm too old to "fanboy" for any game or company.

Don't get me wrong, I don't feel a need to leave a negative review... but it has far from earned a positive review. It is "meh" incarnate. It's a thing. It exists. Congrats on a new program existing. Boo to the devs working on it who learned nothing from the last iteration of the program.

But, they got my money anyway. Despite how much I think it's "Meh" and knew it would be "terrible to meh" before it ever were announced.

So, getting my money is my endorsement of the program. It's passable. It's workable. It's decent. But, you can get a pretty good engine by just buying MV instead. Especially since it already has a ton of assets and upgrades and fixes and plugins for it.