Why is the RPG Maker name so hated?

[Galenmereth]

@Ralpf: That's just the PC master race representing, better than the rest of us:

 

[DavidGil]

I just went through all the negative reviews on the Steam store (there weren't many), only one mentioned RPG Maker.

I haven't played it yet, so I can't really comment. But the negative comments in general weren't very specific....

That clears it up. Like I said, I was going off someone saying that it had been criticised and I just naturally assumed it was the usual RPG Maker hate you so often see.

But still, I'd say it's complaining for complaining's sake. Or trolling. I would hardly call the reviews helpful. Thing is, it's still representative of the larger problem and that is people. People will always look for something to complain about (not saying everyone).

Edit: Taking a few choice quotes myself, now that I've looked myself:

1)

this is the dumbest game ever how the is it 15 dollars why do i have this thing 

this game makes Dust look like GOTY I'm not even joking. 

Why is there good reviews for this what is wrong with this planet

2)

Apparently the technical issues are a fault of RPG Maker, I didn't realize this was made with it until after I wrote my review. Looks like I'll stay away from all games made with it from now on.This game has it all. Terrible "retro" graphics, a high price, poor controls, sound doesn't work, and no controller support. I had to use ctrl, alt, delete to quit the game so I wouldn't waste any more time with it.

3)

Why the was this included in my bundle. Only the sister's of mercy can spare you from this game.

(In reply to this one, it was included in your bundle because it's an RPG Maker game? And because others felt it was a worthy choice? Like I said, illogical complaints. )

Myself, I've played the start of the game. It looks like a lot of effort was put into it and, aside from agreeing that the controls were not as good as they could have been in my view, I thought it was fine. However, it was a bit annoying that the tutorial screens sped by without me needing to press anything. Not sure why that issue wasn't caught really.

Anyway, again, people just look for reasons to complain and, in general, RPG Maker/retro games are easy targets.

Also, while this is a bit off-topic, is anyone familiar with the 'Choice of Games'? Interactive text based games. Two of their titles were recently released on Steam and they're facing similar criticism to what the RPG Maker games face. Much of it is really just illogical.

All this said though, one thing I'd be rather curious about is whether or not To The Moon has received much criticism, despite the praise it's received. But there's currently several thousand review to sift through, so . . . I do, however, remember the release thread on gog.com having a few people grumbling about it and you'd think people there would be quite open to RPG Maker games.

PS: Found where it was originally said that Sweet Lilly Dreams was receiving criticism. Post 120 in this thread, by Amerk. Amerk's thoughts really are much the same as mine. And everytime I see someone say the RTP, the engine or what have you is the problem, I can only shake my head and disagree. The problem is people when it comes to criticism (mindless criticism) and it's also people when it comes to the poor games released. It's not the engine or the rtp (though i can understand people getting tired of it and the default systems. Sometimes there's just not much choice, unfortunately, because of individual talents and resources).

 

[timk1980]

Apologies that I haven't read every reply on this thread yet, so I'm hoping what I'm about to say isn't a total rehash of what's already been said.

 

I think one of the biggest black marks on RPG Maker for commercial titles isn't necessarily overuse of the RTP, or that it's limited in some sense (well, that's not precisely the issue), but rather simply that much of what gets churned out by people using it isn't very good.  I'm not saying everything is bad, and I'm certainly not calling out any particular individuals or trying to shame anyone.  However, if you look at everything that's been released in the wild and think about it, you probably know some examples that resemble what I'm talking about.  Heck, each of us--particularly early on using the maker--probably has a few of our own examples of "games" that are simply atrocities for one reason or another.

 

I think one RPGM's biggest and best features is also the reason for a lot of this... it's easily accessible.  Anyone and everyone can give their shot at putting something together, all they need is the desire to do it.  It's been suggested plenty of times, even in this thread, that some people like using RPGM because they don't have the money, programming skills, time, or artistry to use other "real" engines.  While I can understand that, and sympathize a bit, it's nonetheless hard to read that in the same paragraph that talks about wanting to take a game commercial.  Think for a moment how ridiculous that sounds.  I might as well say that I'm not very good working with my hands, and don't own many tools, but I think I'm going to fix cars for a living.  Now, to be clear, as in either example, this is not to say a person can't learn the skills as they go and acquire the knowledge needed.  In fact, RPGM is a great avenue to making that happen--and there's even a handful of decent commercial titles from some people.

 

Along a similar vein of thought, just look at the some of the posts in this same forum regarding commercial game sales, art asset requests, scripts that are "needed", and so on.  Because the maker is so beginner-friendly, the average quality of product is necessarily not very high.  In and of itself, that's ok, and is part of the learning process.  But those projects should never be considered commercially.  Just looking in the commercial games sub-forum, how often do the posts immediately suggest that the OP simply isn't ready for commercial development?

 

[Ashton]

As Timk said, The biggest problem is people try to sell games that should not be sold - mostly because they are not experianced enough with the engine, or with game design itself. (This is why I'm making my first game free even though I am putting as much effort into it as I would a commercial game (stressing over color choices, abilities, monsters, etc --- I even have a "team" of play-testers going over every map after I myself think it's "finished" to find things that I missed))  If people put more time into these games, and/or made their first (or even second, third, etc) game for free just to learn the engine, I think there would be less hate on the "for sale" games because they'd be higher quality.

 

[whitesphere]

As Timk said, The biggest problem is people try to sell games that should not be sold - mostly because they are not experianced enough with the engine, or with game design itself. (This is why I'm making my first game free even though I am putting as much effort into it as I would a commercial game (stressing over color choices, abilities, monsters, etc --- I even have a "team" of play-testers going over every map after I myself think it's "finished" to find things that I missed))  If people put more time into these games, and/or made their first (or even second, third, etc) game for free just to learn the engine, I think there would be less hate on the "for sale" games because they'd be higher quality.

I agree 100% with this.  Although I think my current work-in-progress is decent, I know my skills are still a long way from commercial quality.  And the only real way to improve is practice, practice, practice.

While it's fun to make the game, it's important to ask ourselves "Is this game good enough that it's worth other people's free time?"  

And I think if more RPG Maker game developers focused on only releasing the best quality games to the commercial level, there would be a lot less complaining about them.

Although I think it would be nice if the negative comments were more specific, so the developer could address the concerns, or at least know where to improve his/her skills, I don't think most people bother posting detailed negative reviews.

 

[timk1980]

<clipped>

Although I think it would be nice if the negative comments were more specific, so the developer could address the concerns, or at least know where to improve his/her skills, I don't think most people bother posting detailed negative reviews.

Though it might be something of a chicken-and-egg problem, I kind of feel like--especially for those who are relatively new-- that forums and groups like this one are more the right avenue to get more specific feedback.  For cases where the quality is just not even on the level it should be, it's probably not worth the average person's time to try to find specific critiques.  To make a somewhat imperfect analogy, it would be like an average 12 year old expecting detailed feedback on an essay they submitted to a university course.  Ignoring the exceptionally gifted individual, whatever is submitted is likely not worth much energy by that professor, since it falls woefully short of the expected requirements.

I'd tend to argue that only when a game is (at least mostly--no game is perfect) complete, consistent, and bug free, can you possibly hope to point out specific deficiencies or opportunities.

 

[TheGreenHorse]

Actually, rm is meant to be for people who want to convert their imagination to reality of a game. They can express themselves. Perhaps you want to make a great real game but poor projects as you call them were meant on that.

 

[whitesphere]

Actually, rm is meant to be for people who want to convert their imagination to reality of a game. They can express themselves. Perhaps you want to make a great real game but poor projects as you call them were meant on that.

I completely understand that many people may have great ideas, and find when they try to implement them in RPG Maker, they make a crappy game.  It's very hard to get all of that stuff right the first time.  My first few partial game attempts were really, really bad, so I threw them away.  But, the more I practice, the more my skills improve.

However, I think it's pointless to post, even a free game, without really completely testing the game and and making sure the game itself is fun to play.   If the developer doesn't put in a best, sincere effort, including playtesting and polishing, it's not going to be an enjoyable game, even if it's the best, most intriguing idea in the world.  And, therefore, it is wasting other people's free time.  

That doesn't mean there can't be mistakes in the game, but you can clearly see a huge difference between a game which has been playtested and polished and one which has not.  If I were to download someone's game, and the game was fun, with engaging characters and an interesting concept, I'd readily forgive many minor bugs and report them to the game developer.  I'd consider that a sincere effort on the developer's part and would want to help.

But, if I were to download someone's game, and the game clearly had severe issues from the get-go, it's another story.  if I see major game-breaking bugs, or find the battles are clearly not balanced, or there are a lot of basic grammar and spelling errors, I would delete the game and, if I were feeling kind, tell the developer what I found.  But I would be very unlikely to download any of that developer's future efforts, unless I saw clear evidence the developer truly is putting forth a sincere effort.

Now, it is very easy to get bugs.  I've had iterations of my current game where the party gets stuck in a wall, or can walk through walls.  These were very easy to fix and I found them within minutes of playtesting.   But, that is precisely why I will not forgive huge, game-breaking bugs that clearly show me the developer didn't playtest the game, at all.

The moral of the story is this:  A great idea does not make a great game.  I agree 100%.  But there's no shame in saying "Well, this game isn't fun, I'll toss it out and start another one."  As developers work in RPG Maker and build their skills, they can eventually make games that anyone can enjoy, rather than churn out half-baked games that aren't fun to play.  

 

[timk1980]

 

Actually, rm is meant to be for people who want to convert their imagination to reality of a game. They can express themselves. Perhaps you want to make a great real game but poor projects as you call them were meant on that.

 

However, I think it's pointless to post, even a free game, without really completely testing the game and and making sure the game itself is fun to play.   If the developer doesn't put in a best, sincere effort, including playtesting and polishing, it's not going to be an enjoyable game, even if it's the best, most intriguing idea in the world.  And, therefore, it is wasting other people's free time.  

The "poor projects" certainly were meant as just an idea brought to life, of course, and that's fine.  As whitesphere explains nicely though, that doesn't mean it's something ready for public consumption.  And it most definitely does not excuse such a project being passed off as a commercial work.

 

[Ultimacj]

Graphics don't make a good game.  Period.

I've played many games that are "shiny" and "pretty" while I was very impressed with the graphics just the game play was extremely poor (Alice Returns - great example).  Course Bad or Great graphics isn't necessary a "deal breaker" for me.  It's usually game play or poor controls.

and in the case of 3d games...bad camera angles or lack there of to control them (Castlevania 3d games are famous for this)

I can see why there is not much love to the RTP resources whether they are being used good or bad it's just what people said "it's been done to death".  Though I've just now finished very first project, most of it's resources graphic use the RTP tilesets (and I've gotten mixed opinions on them both here and steam workshop, good and bad - can't please everyone^^).  There's a few custom tile sets but for the most part, just the basic RTP sets because A:  I was starting out and B:  I actually looked nice to me for considering the theme of the game.

Honestly nothing wrong with RTP sets, though personally I wish RPG Maker had a bit more to go on, which is why my water themed area is a custom tile set, RTP didn't really have anything I wanted to go by.  If people are going by strict graphics if a game is playable or not, especially for RPG Maker, keep in mind that the engine is based off 2d/some 3d/mode 7 SNES / Genesis like graphics.  If you're looking for Final Fantasy XXXIIVIVIII type of graphics, you've came to the wrong place   but again this drives to my original point.

Graphics don't make a good game.  Period.

 

[saintivan]

Ultimaca said: "the engine is based off 2d/some 3d/mode 7 SNES / Genesis like graphics."

The graphics are more accurately in between that generation and the following generation of consoles.

 

[sabao]

I don't think we should really pander to anything anyone who hates RM outright says. They're likely not the audience we're after anyway, and they're likely not the types who play indies that don't already have a lot of hype going for them in the first place either, so why bother.

I think one problem with RPG Maker for most detractors is that very few developers using the software actually care to venture past most of what's been packaged. They may choose to make custom graphics of their own for their games, but most of the time these are still supplements to what the RTP provides. A lot of us familiar with RM may recognize what is or isn't RTP, but to the uninitiated it becomes difficult to tell Game X apart from Game Y because the two still resemble one another aesthetically.

This very ubiquitous "RTP style" brings up another problem: It's too easy to tell it's an RPG Maker game. Software like EB!'s own IGM or Stencyl or Construct or Game Maker don't have to worry about consumer stigma because games made with these engines don't have the same distinct visual identity games made with RPG Maker do. Bad games are made with other engines every day, but you're more likely to be able to recognize one made in RPG Maker.

Also, I feel one other problem most people have with RPG Maker is that many think it's a crutch. Why not use real code?

Well, hell. It does the job I want it to do. Why not? Why pore over math formulas for stats and code a JRPG from the ground up when there's already software that does most of that for you? RM is an excellent tool for aspiring JRPG developers because the groundwork is ready and the rest of the game can be done via simple visual coding. Visual coding, which is more or less what RM's events system is, isn't unique to the RM series. Again, software like Stencyl and Construct use a more or less similar "beginner-friendly" method for programming. Hell, even Unity's got a visual scripting plugin, and they're plenty popular among its users. Game development isn't exclusively the domain of programmers.

 

[Zoltor]

I don't think we should really pander to anything anyone who hates RM outright says. They're likely not the audience we're after anyway, and they're likely not the types who play indies that don't already have a lot of hype going for them in the first place either, so why bother.

I think one problem with RPG Maker for most detractors is that very few developers using the software actually care to venture past most of what's been packaged. They may choose to make custom graphics of their own for their games, but most of the time these are still supplements to what the RTP provides. A lot of us familiar with RM may recognize what is or isn't RTP, but to the uninitiated it becomes difficult to tell Game X apart from Game Y because the two still resemble one another aesthetically.

This very ubiquitous "RTP style" brings up another problem: It's too easy to tell it's an RPG Maker game. Software like EB!'s own IGM or Stencyl or Construct or Game Maker don't have to worry about consumer stigma because games made with these engines don't have the same distinct visual identity games made with RPG Maker do. Bad games are made with other engines every day, but you're more likely to be able to recognize one made in RPG Maker.

Also, I feel one other problem most people have with RPG Maker is that many think it's a crutch. Why not use real code?

Well, hell. It does the job I want it to do. Why not? Why pore over math formulas for stats and code a JRPG from the ground up when there's already software that does most of that for you? RM is an excellent tool for aspiring JRPG developers because the groundwork is ready and the rest of the game can be done via simple visual coding. Visual coding, which is more or less what RM's events system is, isn't unique to the RM series. Again, software like Stencyl and Construct use a more or less similar "beginner-friendly" method for programming. Hell, even Unity's got a visual scripting plugin, and they're plenty popular among its users. Game development isn't exclusively the domain of programmers.

Yea, there's this utterly stupid line of thought going around(started by coders when the original RPG maker came out, however that was back when RPG Maker actually did have restrictions, but the newest RPG Maker has nearly no restrictions at all. This Isn't the 90s-early 2,000s anymore), that you have to make a game from the ground up, through coding for it to be any good. That is the dumbest thing I ever heard of. The way eventing is set up, is that  just about every individual action, as well as if statements, among other things, is just translated in RPG Maker. Rather It's coded or evented, it does the exact same thing.

Also yea the same goes for anything that requires math calculations(It's the exact same thing, why would you want to code that crap, when there's another option), database objects(same thing here, except unlike with math calculsted things like stat grown, battle systems, ect, database stuff is easy to code. However you'll be spending thousands of hours just adding items, and such through code. Why would anyone opt to waste their time coding all that if there's another option, that allows you to do the exact same thing without burning thousands of hours that would better be spent on mapping or making the "actual" game), ect, 

 

[RaZzi]

Greenlight ruined RPG Maker. It's so full of **** and I don't mean the rtp (which in creative hands can be actually quite beautiful). I mean the bad mapping, bad stories (epic battle fought 3000 years ago), bad everything. They lack real effort and talent


Sent from my GT-P5210 using Tapatalk

 

[Zoltor]

Greenlight ruined RPG Maker. It's so full of **** and I don't mean the rtp (which in creative hands can be actually quite beautiful). I mean the bad mapping, bad stories (epic battle fought 3000 years ago), bad everything. They lack real effort and talent

Sent from my GT-P5210 using Tapatalk

Yea, Greenlight amplified a stigma that was always tied to RPG Maker,  worse, 10 fold worse.

Before Greenlight, it was like a little mouse running around, saying It's a RPG Maker game, how much could you possibly do with that, but after Greenlight, it turned into a angry mob screaming you can only make crappy games with RPG Maker, ect.

 

[saintivan]

Greenlight leveled the playing field for all, including many who shouldn't be in the game. Well, everyone can vote too...etc. Any field will be packed with the average, the below average, and the totally inept.  Just as Greenlight has exposed the truly pitiful RPG maker games out there (I have groaned through my share), it will cast a favorable light on the RPG Maker name for those games that make it.

 

[Razzazaki]

When i first saw rpg maker i thought it was just a map editor like some games like wc3 Age of empire nwn have.

i had no idea itself was an engine.

 

[sabao]

Greenlight ruined RPG Maker. It's so full of **** and I don't mean the rtp (which in creative hands can be actually quite beautiful). I mean the bad mapping, bad stories (epic battle fought 3000 years ago), bad everything. They lack real effort and talent

Sent from my GT-P5210 using Tapatalk

Greenlight just did what RPG Maker did before it: Even the playing field. You don't need to be a programmer to use RM, and with Greenlight, you no longer need a publisher to distribute or promote your games. The lack of a gatekeeper that checks for quality means that more often than not, a lot of bad games will come up. That can't be helped. Again, I feel the problem is that RM games do possess a distinct visual identity to them as compared to games made with anything else so it's easier to point fingers when another crappy RM game comes along.

I know graphics aren't everything in a game, but they are the first impression and Greenlight/Kickstarter/whatever are all about first impressions. The RTP is still an acceptable approach to making your game, but I think we have to acknowledge that there is that stigma, so if you really want to put your game up on Greenlight there's some serious stepping up that needs to be done to make your game appear more marketable.

 

[TheGreenHorse]

There are many types of people who make games in RM. A lot of things matter for specific people.

1. Idea for the game
2. Originality of Resources
3. Experience in the engine
4. Usage of scripts, Ability to script
5. What do you aim (Very Important)

Many people have good ideas but can't craft them into RM because of lacking experience in the Engine.

Many people fuss about Originality of resources. The RTP can be used to make a lot of things. As sharm said it was great once, but now it has been used too many times. So you should try originality, but using the RTP is not a harm.

Many people have no experience in the engine. You are at a big loss here. If you want to distribute your game, rate it accordingly. You need to build yourself before posting games commercially, and also remember that you should tell people that it's worth what. People will get irritated if you grasp their free time by giving charming reviews.

Well, scripting is a lot. Many people distribute scripts, even for commercial uses. I hope there's plenty on the web. You can also learn to script yourself.

Look. If you aim to make a great game, you must not get to it at start. You know you can't make a great game in your first attempt to make it. So remember if you know the standard of your game is not so good:

• Review it accordingly. People get very annoyed if you often give very good reviews and they don't like the game. It grabs a lot of important time for them.
• Do not sell your game. This will surely get you a bad war on your place, like Green lights. Even the most decent games might not be of commercial level

Get yourself experienced. Then if you think that it's worth it then sell your game.

If you just want to make a idea, make it come alive, and win a dream: then you shouldn't think about selling your game. It's just a idea which comes alive. Don't take it seriously. 

That will win your happiness. Also state that your game is just a idea coming alive if you think of distributing it, and even rate if it's worth playing or not. It will make increase your respect more than giving charming reviews not worth it, which lead to bad problems.

 

[taarna23]

I have found there to be a lot of negative within this thread, along with some positive. However, there was enough negative to make me start rethinking things for my project - do I really want to use RPG Maker? Even if I do, do I want to use RTP graphics?

The short answer is yes.

The long answer takes a bit of explanation, but a nice guy out there summed up up far better than I can in his blog post.

He says use free graphics. In this case, more applicable is use the RTP.

The next step up is to use free graphics. There are thousands of game graphics out there on the web. Admittedly, they have problems:

• They may not be the most attractive. "Dude, these free graphics are totally sucky compared to StarCraft."
• They may not fit your exact mental vision. "No, the Xenli Sorcesses has four silver spikes on her bosom armor, not two. It is completely wrong!"
• They may not be complete: "I really need a female knight and and they only supplied a male knight! The end is nigh!"
• Other people might be using them in their games. "Argh, now my RPG looks just like the one done by that guy in Australia. *sigh* Now I will never be l33t."

My heartfelt recommendation is that you get over it. None of these is really a blocker. If you can build a game with limited art, you can certainly build a game with a few carefully chosen bits of free art. Here are some answers to common complaints.

• You aren't Blizzard. That's okay. You can still make a fun game.
• Design is about coming up with great solutions in the face of complex constraints. In order to design a great game, you will need to adapt your vision to reality a thousand times. Practice your problem solving skills by using free game graphics in the best way possible to get as close to your vision as possible.
• If the set isn't complete, get creative! If you need two knight graphics, colorize one blue and one red. If you need a dragon boss, colorize one of your knights black and change the villain to be the Dark Knight. Even primitive graphics skills can triple the number of usable graphics if you show a little initiative.
• You browse free game graphics archives, but your customers do not. Out of the thousands of people that play your game, only a small handful will recognize that you are using free graphics. The only ones who care are typically merely would-be game developers snobs. Ignore them. That is easy enough.

For those feeling disheartened by those that are saying "don't use RTP, you game will not be its best," don't worry about it. It's not their game. It's your game. Do what you dream, within your means, and ignore the "would-be game developer snobs." Do what they've proven they cannot, and be a game developer.