Why is the RPG Maker name so hated?

I thoroughly disagree with the "originality" statement. People don't need originality as much as they need quality. Tell the oldest story in the world in the best way possible and you will still catch peoples attention every time. The trouble is that they all try and be the same one game and do it really badly. You are right in that stories need to branch out and have their own flavor. But nobodies going to complain about pickup up a holy sword and slaying the resurrected demon of darkness if every step along the way is a 100kg barbell of awesome.


I honestly think some games fail because they try to be "original" .. and just end up being boring. I'm not dissing originality. I just think that sometimes we put it on a pedestal. No one wants to listen to your amazing new trope defying idea if the reason no one has ever done it before was because it was dull as dishwater.

 

I don't really mind a boring story or gameplay mechanics seen before a hundred times as long as the presentation is professional. Like, get your spelling and grammar right and make sure the visuals aren't all over the place and I'll give your game a try.


That said, though, Helladen has a point, too. You should definitely at least consider other options for game mechanics and all that. Think about things, you know? Get creative.

 

A cliche story is plain boring. Try to make a game like Chrono Trigger today with the cliches of the main hero, you will get a lot of gamers complaining about the game. You need to avoid using stuff that has been done a million times. To the Moon was successful because, it offered a unique style of storytelling in a visual novel way. It showcased a unique story as well, which captivated audiences of all groups - not just casual or hardcore but both.

 

You people keep debating whether it's originality or quality that matters the most when it's obvious that it depends on the player. As you demonstrate yourself by arguing, different people values different things. Quality or originality, if you have one or the other, there will most likely be an audience. Finding said audience on the other hand is a different problem.

 

Quality doesn't sell, sorry. The only thing quality is useful for is marketing something that has an appeal. If you have no marketing budget, the quality or production value is going to really not make you capture an audience. It is the originality which will captivate them the most. Games like Undertale with horrible production value sold in the millions due to originality.

 

@Helladen

You're being single minded.

Undertale is just one game amongst many and it's a bad example since I think it does have sufficient quality as well as decent originality. A better example would've been Minecraft. Sure it was a fantastic original concept but the overall quality wasn't especially good. On the other hand you have games such as Call of Duty. Those games have little to NO originality, but they are great quality productions - and they sell that crap like ice cream in hell.

It all breaks down to what I just said in the post above. Sure, being original is great, but no, you don't have to be original to sell anything. You need something, and that can be quality, originality or maybe just dumb luck. I mean, flappy bird didn't have either but went viral for completely different reasons anyway!

The market isn't black or white, it's just not that simple.

 

I understand how the market works. Quality does sell if you have something people already want. How you draw attention to a product is to be original, innovate or just have a lot of money to market or get lucky. It is much easier though, to be original than it is to be lucky with high polish or production value. Both help and both do sell, but one is just more important in all honesty. Functionality of a product outweighs how good it looks.

 

@Helladen

Just so we're clear here. Functionality is has more to do with quality than originality. The quality of a game can refer to anything from graphics and audio to gameplay and story while originality is just, well doing something new or fresh. Therefore when you say;

It makes no sense. Polished gameplay or a well told story, even if they've been done before, is still something people want. Hence if you got quality you most likely have something people want. Another example for you to consider - Candy Crush. It met great success partly because the basic bejeweled gameplay is something people enjoy even to this day. Is it original? Hell no.

And I still stand by my earlier statement that you can't say one is universally more important than the other because it all depends on what your product is trying to be and to whom you're trying to sell it. There are many ways to success and I don't think it's wise to restrict yourself and rule some of them out. Focus on whatever you think you can excel at and try your best to make everything else as good as possible. Friendly advice to whomever is reading.

 

@Parallax Panda Candy Crush Saga was a lucky game. Just like Farmvile. You get a bunch of copycats when a game gets big and polish has to do with gameplay yes, but what I was saying was to focus on the original idea of your game first. If the game is good enough, then focus on the polish and actual game. I wasn't stating to make a horrible game with bad controls, but you need to worry about that after you have something that will sell. Of course games done before will sell, but will it be worth your time? Most likely not. Most people will not make money using your advice. Everyone works like this, and there's less competition when being original.

 

@Helladen

Yes, but it's also more difficult to make something original (and good).

Most games that get crazy big like Candy Crush, Minecraft or Pokemon GO have enjoyed a healthy potion of luck. That much goes without saying. It still proves that concepts done to death can still sell well enough in today's market at a profit though.
Obviously the best product should not focus on one single aspect but try to be fresh, polished and hopefully also "lucky". That being said, I feel that you obsess over originality as it's some holy grail that you need to have to be successful when truth be told - it's incredibly rare! Take a good look at most games or movies and see how many you can find without any tropes or clichés. Almost everything have been done or at least thought of before by someone else.

I feel that to elevate this conversation I need you to explain to me exactly what you would consider "being original"? After all, unless you rip something off all works have some originality to it, although some more than others of course. How much originality are we talking about here?

As far as my advice goes. I agree that most people won't make money by following it. Mostly because most people don't have the intent or put in the effort needed to actually try to make money in the first place. And even among those that do, not everyone is a winner. Most people never even finish a game!
But the advice itself however is solid as far as I'm concerned. And not just for gaming but for any kind of business. You want to use what you have. Whatever skills or tricks that may be, that's what you want to try to sell people. Take the guy who made To The Moon as (yet another) example. He knew how to make music and that (as well as the story) was clearly the games main focus. And it turned out great! It's not bad advice to tell people to capitalize on what they actually know how to do, it's more like common sense.

 

There's also a reason why tropes become tropes. They are generally the most popular way of doing things or telling stories. Honestly I like I said I'm not dissing originality. But a game can be successful without originality. It can NOT be successful without quality. Also Undertale really isn't as original as people like to give it credit for. It did a lot of cool things but when you get down to the root of it It's Alice in wonderland with a morality system. And Undertale oozed quality. It's not an example of what originality can do with no quality. The storytelling was great the art was appealing if lowfi and the music was PHENOMENAL. Undertale had quality up the wazoo and I don't think it could have sold on it's "originality" alone.
Even things that appear original are just things that haven't been done in a while.


An original pile of excrement is STILL a pile of excrement. But people will still queue down the street for a REALLY good doughnut.

 

@ RHachicho People will queue up for anything (excrement included) if it gets enough media attention. A painting of the Virgin Mary with elephant dung on it was display at an art museum...and wound up at auction for over two million dollars.

 

Dont forget duchamp's fountain.

 

You have to try to be original as possible, but plan your game out in a way that is a safe kind of originality. You don't want to make it all new and fresh, only the best game designers know how to do that. What you want to do is offer something that is fresh and exciting. Think of like, a lead female protagonist, a game for Christians or Muslims. Something that is marketable, that is what I am talking about. You need to try to be different.

 

In my opinion, you need both originality and quality. If you have yet another carbon copy of Final Fantasy, nobody's going to play your game, whether it be good or not. But, if you try to be original and your game is trash, no one's going to play that either. You need to find a good mix of both to make a game good. And for God's sake, make the visuals and audio good! The root of a good game is to make it memorable. 

 

A fair point .. but honestly I think this is more to do with the hipster effect than anything else. People don't buy that stuff because they LIKE it. They buy it so they can say ooh look at me i'm artsy and original! They buy it to share in the media attention and be part of that whole bs society. If marketing to that demographic is your thing then be my guest. I think it might just destroy my soul though lol. 

 

As a side note, Pokemon GO was not luck. It was actually a brand that was already established. There's like no way that game would of failed. It just blew up bigger than they expected. That part was "luck", but you can trace that back to what people wanted. It hit what people were after. That's what luck is in games. Something that you can't accurately "predict". Candy Crush Saga is another example of that. Only very good game designers know what the masses want before they know they want it themselves. Once it is saturated though, there's no more want for that specific game. It is being first to the punch.

 

@Helladen

Of course a big brand like Pokemon wouldn't be a complete dud, the fanbase is to big. But they still couldn't expect how big it went on to be which is what we call luck (I don't believe in "luck"  as a concept but that is beside the point).
 

I don't believe the best game designers on the market is much more likely in finding the next "new" thing than random indie developer. It's just about who gets the idea first and have the means to capitalize on the concept. It could be anyone. And top ranking game developers tend to stick to what they know is good rather than taking a chance on something that might not be. The only big company that constantly tries to be new and fresh that I can think of right now is Nintendo. And while I love what they're doing we can all agree that they too, while being experts and professionals, bet on the wrong horse once in a while *cough*WiiU*cough*.

If your idea of originality is a lead female protagonist (a lot of those around) then well, yeah sure. It's not exactly fresh but personally i tend to like a female lead character. Trying to make games for Christians or Muslims is something I wouldn't gamble on myself. People have been trying to make games specifically for Christian before and as far as I know, they've all failed or gone unnoticed. Probably because most religious people who do play games enjoy normal games. And those who don't... well they don't play games. Not saying that there isn't some yet to be discovered gold mine here though, just that I personally don't believe in that market.

However it sounds more and more like you're saying; "try to add some original ideas to your game, but it doesn't have to be something too crazy. Swap the muscular barbarian named Conan for a female lead character and give her a somewhat original name instead." Well, if that is what you're saying than sure, I buy it. But I doubt most serious game developers fail to do at least that much, no? Personally I wouldn't stand developing something that didn't feel like it was MY game and for that it needs to be at least a little original.

But I think I'll end it here. I've been up all night, it's 08:40 in the morning and I think this argument with you have lead me astray from my original post which was neither pro quality or pro originality. What I really believe and wanted to say is what I wrote in the first post. Original game/quality game, it's all good whatever you choose as long as you do what you do well enough. Both ways can buy you a ticket on the gravy train.

And with that I'll say, Good night to you good sir! :

 

I have a hard time following the argument above, but to me, it seems that all of you have reached the conclusion that some people like high quality games and some people like original games, and both types of people hate RPG Maker because the games it typically produces are neither high quality nor original.

 

@Pierman Walter

Most people who don't like "RM games" and express this opinion loud enough for you to hear it have probably had a bad experience and/or seen to many bad games made with this engine. The "RM brand" is something they associate with bad quality and lack of originality. They often think it's easy-peasy child's play to put together a RM game and since the result is always lackluster (in their eyes) a usual argument seems to be "This game should be given away for free!".

It's to bad really, when people look at what engine the game is made in before they really look at the game. Makes it a bit harder to make money on a game that easily can be connected to this "tainted" image of what an RM game is. Still not impossible though.