3d-Rpg maker?

[+ Novem 344]

I have used that before but I am working on my own game that I want to eventually put on steam(Gotta have dreams right) And I don't own fallout so yeah

 

How have you used it before if you don't own Fallout? O.o

[amerk 1,122]

Most RM users wouldn't know where to begin in creating 3D games or resources, which is why many who wish to dive into 3D use other programs. I really don't see EB changing this up any time soon, not for their branded RM titles anyways.

 

That said, they could consider branching out into other products that do cater to a different crowd. I know IG wasn't a very good seller, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't take other risks. IG could make for a very good sequel with all of the needed fixes.

 

In other words, they can still make RM for the 2D crowd, IG 2 for the platformers and adventurers, and maybe a more complexed program (RM Pro?) for those who want to make games that involve more complexed coding.

[Skylar1146 11]

I have used that before but I am working on my own game that I want to eventually put on steam(Gotta have dreams right) And I don't own fallout so yeah

 

How have you used it before if you don't own Fallout? O.o

I mean like I don't own the rights to the fallout franchise

[+ Novem 344]

Anyways, yes, FPS Creator is a good bit of technology. It would be the real next step in trying to explore game development, because developing for 3D is inherently more difficult then 2D. But FPS Creator is about as expandable as VX Ace is. It has a custom scripting language that can be used to completely change the capabilities of the engine.

 

Just because it's an "entry-level program" or "for beginners" doesn't mean it should lack in functionality.

 

3D increases complexity. As an entry-level program for beginners, this is a functionality it should lack. RPG Maker is really the simplest game creation tool out there because it doesn't rely on 3D functions and tries to keep it as simple as possible, allowing newbies to explore the basics of game design. Not only that, it allows newer resource creators and artists stretch their capabilities on the simpler RTP style of 2D pixel art instead of intense and difficult 3D modelling and texturing.

 

If you are more experienced, you can create something more complex using RPG Maker... but that isn't what it's primarily designed for and I wouldn't want it to be. If you want an engine with 3D functionality or more capabilities, RPG Maker shouldn't be where you go in the first place. There are several engines for people who are intermediate or advanced level game designers, there's no need to pull the rug out from under the newbies.

[Velvela Jade 8]

You do realize that saying that Newbies should stick to 2D game makers like VX Ace is also saying that Game Engine Programmers are too stupid to figure out how to program a game engine in 3D that would work for Newbie Game makers.

 

I am so over game makers who think that newbies should just stick to easy stuff. Some of us newbies got into game making for the simple reason that no one cared to make a game that works for us. For starters, HP Sims was NEVER sold in USA. I was livid as I was the fool who asked for HP SIMs. I always wanted a game that mixed Harry Potter and The Tomorrow People (UK, childrens sci-fi show) that had as its main focus questing instead of blood, guts and gorry. I wanted a game that had creative puzzles to figure out that actually worked for how my brain was wired. I have a whopping choice of Mensa levels puzzles or preschool/elementary level puzzles if I want to go beyond Sudoku. I was forced into taking my defective brain and creating it myself. 

 

In conclusion, I'd like to see a stop to the relegating newbies to simple minded game making. I have a cognitive disorder of such a nature that I should have flunked college/university. Instead, I graduated with a degree in Social Science (a pre-law major) with concentrates in Sociology, Criminal Justice and History. Just because we are newbies does not mean we aren't capable. 

Thanks!

[Velvela Jade 8]

To EB:

I would like to see an end to the arbitrary limits that EB thinks they must impose on us. And yes, to make the programmer happy who has to program the Game Engine, setting the limits to 100,000 would work for even the most studious game maker trying to reinvent Skyrim.  These limits make it almost impossible to make a SIMs type game. SIMs type games in their very nature, have more variables, maps, switches, maps, skills, weapons, maps and did I mention maps? Yes, I do use the Databreaker by game_guy. 

Thanks!

Edited February 23, 2013 by Velvela Jade

[+ Novem 344]

Velvela Jade, do not double post within 72 hours. There is an edit button for a reason.

 

Also, no, I never said that. In fact, I said that the next step newbies should take is probably FPS Creator, as that was also meant to ease noobs into game design. The problem is that 3D game creation is fundamentally more complex then 2D, so newbies should start simple.

 

Newbies should stick to the simple stuff. You don't learn something by diving into something extremely complex at first, you learn something by starting from the bottom and working up. Patience is required when learning something, trying to jump right in without knowledge of the basics is like jumping into a river without a boat or a paddle. Learning should be natural and slow, taken one thing at a time so that true understanding can be developed.

 

For example, do they teach you Trigonometry in first grade? No, they teach basic math. Do they teach you how to read immediately? No, they teach you the alphabet.

 

You can think you are as "capable" as you like, but it doesn't change the fact that teaching someone starts with the basics.

[Besus 6]

To be fair though, FPS Maker was a terrible game engine itself. No doubt it would make be a fairly minimal transition for those familiar with RPG Maker to get in to 3D, even if it is a different genre of game. The difficulty of a 3D engine for a RPG comes when you need to set up the actual RPG systems. Creating maps for FPS games is fairly simple, and after about a half hour of tutorial videos, anyone could start making some rooms in Unreal or Source engine.

 

That's why (in my opinion) like I mentioned earlier, if you could use the encompassing RPG Maker engine to set up the skills/items/characters/etc and then instead of being presented with a 2D editor, you were instead given a 3D, brush-based editor, many would be able to make the transition in minimal time.

[Skylar1146 11]

It's mostly to do with how lazy people are. Yes I am going to make that remark. Most people are too lazy to even look up how to do the simplest things like recolor a sprite, which litterally takes 15 seconds. I search through the forums of this site and I can see to and fro people who just simply want everything handed to them. They don't want to put in the effort of making a sprite, or learning ruby. If people put forth the effort of wanting to learn, then you could throw the most complicated engine at them and they would try to learn it. If you want to learn how to do something(say model) then all it takes is a quick google search. I learned how to model in about 45 minutes and in an hour made a very detailed objects that was textured and everything. I actually find it harder to make sprites due to the very limited size where you have to fit it all in a 32x32 tile. With modeling I have a huge pallet basically.  If they could make the same eventing system and mapping system in a 3d realm, it would hardly be a transition. 

Edited February 24, 2013 by Skylar1146

[DP3 188]

http://maker3d.tk/

[Skylar1146 11]

That looks pretty neat, Idk about the quality though seems kind of unprofessional.

[DP3 188]

You're probably not going to find any better quality maker that allows you to work having no program experience.

Considering you've said you've got experience in C#, why don't you just use Unity?

 

Enterbrain already made a 3D maker for PS2, and from what I've heard it was pretty crappy (apparently had worse graphics than N64).

[Skylar1146 11]

I have looked into unity, but you have to have licenses (In the 1000$ dollar range) to release commercially. Right now I am taking a break from RPG maker and coding a game for XNA

[+ Novem 344]

 I learned how to model in about 45 minutes and in an hour made a very detailed objects that was textured and everything. I actually find it harder to make sprites due to the very limited size where you have to fit it all in a 32x32 tile. With modeling I have a huge pallet basically.  If they could make the same eventing system and mapping system in a 3d realm, it would hardly be a transition. 

 

Not everyone is going to have the same experience learning something. Some things are tougher to learn for some people then others, and it's easy to forget that what may be easy for you may also be extremely difficult for someone else.

[Tsukihime 1,489]

I have looked into unity, but you have to have licenses (In the 1000$ dollar range) to release commercially. Right now I am taking a break from RPG maker and coding a game for XNA

Well ya...I mean, if you're planning to go commercial, $1000 probably isn't that big of a set-back.

Of course it isn't as cheap as $90 or whatever but you get what you pay for?

Edited February 24, 2013 by Tsukihime

[Skylar1146 11]

1000$ is out of my league as a jobless 15 year old 

And you are right @Obrusine. Though even then I had lots of trouble understanding stuff, and had to go back and redo lots of things

[West Mains 1]

I don't know if it's been said already, but RPM tried to go 3D with RPGMaker 3 on the PS2. Now, granted, technology was nothing compared to how it is now, but I just don't think the 3D RPGMaker market is big enough. If you ask me, pixel graphics allow for a lot of customisation, a feature that anyone can take part in with relatively easy to use software. Whereas customising 3D models is a little less mass-market friendly, and I wouldn't see as many people doing it if the next RPGMaker were to go full-3D. 

 

If you ask me, next installments should focus on adding more customisation power to the creators, letting us do more and more with software and aesthetics we're already familiar and adept with, rather than trying to dive into relatively unfamiliar and financially risky territories. 

[Skylar1146 11]

I think a big thing they should add to the next editor if it were to stay 2d is to let use determine the size of tiles. Like instead of 32X32 we could make it  256X256 or even 1024X1024 (Yes that is crazy I know) because if we did it that way we could have soooooo much more detail

[West Mains 1]

It would be very cool. I don't know what that might do to the program. Would it make games way more intensive in some way? I know these games really aren't straining for even low-end computers by todays standards, but still.

 

A feature I'd like to see would be an in-game tile/sprite/stuff editor. Even if it just simple things like colour swaps and stuff like that. 

[+ Novem 344]

Just a thought I had, I don't really see the point in making a 3D RPG Maker until they have perfected the 2D process. They still haven't done that. There is still so much more they could add and expand on first.

[Tsukihime 1,489]

Less dependency on auto-tiles would be nice. It's probably one of the reasons why the tiles are 32x32.

On the other hand, 3D auto-tiles would be pretty crazy lol just have cubes instead of squares and there's no problem with the size of each cube just scale the thing and all of the texture-coords will be scaled as well. Just need to make sure your engine's using mipmapping otherwise it might look blurry.

Edited February 24, 2013 by Tsukihime

[Sievnn 14]

That is propably not 3D, but at least it gives some of the feeling?

 

[Skylar1146 11]

Wow that's awesome! I love that!

[FleshRenderStudios 21]

Just to point a few things out (and I don't know if any of these have already been pointed out because Iv'e only read the first page of comments), Unity is one of the easiest 3D engines to use if you have 0 ~ some 3D experience. It does have an event system that is pretty much select an option, do a command, force a result which is pretty nifty for beginner's. Not too sure about it's coding elements as I have not used the engine myself just did a quick search and looked through the Unity Forums at the amount of help and support.

 

UDK on the other hand has more readily available resources and a large number of people on the UDK Market give them away for free and also offer ton's of advice on how to use or adapt the engine to do certain things. Also it has it's own coding language (Unreal Library provided in software download) and is also free to use for non-commercial and commercial uses provided you make less than £50,000 (GBP) from the product that you sell. So this make's it very good for startup companies and or hobbyist's with a HUGE passion for making games =)

A nice thing I would like to see is a view changer so you could map the front end of a cliff face or change the angle your game is viewed in.

 

And before someone says it has to be 3D before you can change camera angle's, I say *balls* no end of 2d software allow's you to change viewport's or angle's including a large number of 2d game's that have already been made =) 

[Tsukihime 1,489]

But a 2D object is flat; all you see is a single face. There is no concept of "front" "side" or "back" when it comes to 2D.

 

If I gave you a drawing on a piece of paper and ask you to rotate it, you're still going to see the same drawing.

Edited February 24, 2013 by Tsukihime